nt on the Plan:

l Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement, Rock Creek Park and the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway can be

rom the NPS’ planning web site (http://planning.nps.gov/plans.cfm). This site can also be accessed by using the links from the

http://www.nps.gov/rocr). 

neral Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement, Rock Creek Park and the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway are

ed for 90 days following publication of notification in the Federal Register. You can submit your comments via mail or elec

mments to:

k Creek Park

W

07

omments sent via the internet from the Rock Creek Park web site at http://www.nps.gov/rocr/dgmp/home.htm 

ically via e-mail by sending comments to: nps_rocr_gmp@nps.gov

ment, please include your name and street address with your message.

practice to make comments, including names and addresses of respondents, available for public review. Individual respondents

d their address from the record, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. However, we will not consider anonymous

l submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of

 available for public inspection in their entirety.
ts

tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

d Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

ent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

General Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . .5

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Management of Established Park Uses . .11

Current Management/No Action . . . . . . .12

zed Recreation Emphasis . . . . . . . . . . . .13

day Recreation Enhancement . . . . . . . . .14

ternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Environmentally Preferred Alternative . .19

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

List of TablesTable 1: Summary of Management Prescriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7Table 2: Summary of Key Features of the Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . .9Table 3: Criteria Used to Establish Each Impact Topic . . . . . . . . . . .16Table 4: Summary of Impacts of the Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20List of FiguresRegion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Alternative A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Alternative B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Alternative C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13Alternative D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

1

Need for Action

Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway are popular

tem that are heavily used by the public. This use

ersonnel and facilities to protect resources and

experience. Use and associated demands are

future. A coordinated, integrated plan is required

e (NPS) to guide park management to best meet

 placed on the area.

experience, natural resource, and cul

the park and parkway are specified

must be determined through plan

e draft general management plan

perience conditions that are not

y.

there is much that the public

f the most common comments

e park is fine just the way it 

e want the traditional character

However, without management,

d adversely affect the park-like

commuter traffic, are projected 

ntinued use of some of the park’s 

inistration offices may affect their 

al management planning in Rock Creek Park is

icting purposes of protecting the scenic, natural,

e park, while concurrently providing for appro

esources. This issue is complicated by the loca

thin a major metropolitan area. As a result of its

users, some of whom hold widely varying opin

The General Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement: RockCreek Park and the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway will be the basicdocument for managing Rock Creek Park and the Rock Creek and PotomacParkway. The purposes of the general management plan are to:

• Specify resource conditions and visitor experiences to be achieved

in Rock Creek Park and the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway; and

• Provide the basic foundation for decision-making regarding the management of the park and parkway.

The final general management plan will be the first comprehensive plan prepared for Rock Creek Park and the Rock

Creek and Potomac Parkway by the National Park Service.

The plan will represent an agreement by the National Park

Service with the public on how the park and parkway will be

used and managed. 

The general management plan does not propose specific

actions or describe how particular programs or projects

should be ranked or implemented. Those decisions will be

addressed during the more detailed planning associated with

strategic plans, annual performance plans, and implementation

plans. All of those plans will derive from the goals, future conditions, and appropriate types of activities established in the general

management plan. As part of that decision-making process, project-specific National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents would be prepared prior to the implementation of any of the actions included in this general management plan.

Area Covered by the PlanAs shown in the Region map, Rock Creek Park is located in the northernportion of Washington, D.C. It consists primarily of an undeveloped, wooded
2

utaries and some uplands. The major landscape

erennial stream that flows along the length of 

 Potomac River south of the park. The park is

he heavily urbanized metropolitan Washington,

eral management plan includes the lands admin

rk Service in the Rock Creek valley from the

 the National Zoo, the 2-mile-long Rock Creek

 the National Zoo to Virginia Avenue, and lands

 Rock Creek.

Park and Parkway PurposesThe 1890 legislation that established Rock Creek Park states that the area isto be “perpetually dedicated and set apart as a public park or pleasure groundfor the benefit and enjoyment of the people of the United States.” It specifiesthat the park is to “provide for the preservation from injury or spoliation ofall timber, animals, or curiosities within said park, and their retention in theirnatural condition, as nearly as possible.” Rock Creek Park is linked to thePotomac River and the monumental core of Washington, D.C. by the RockCreek and Potomac Parkway, which was established by Congress in 1913.The general management plan includes purpose statements for the park andparkway that were developed based on these units’ legislative mandates and onNPS policies. The purpose statements are the most fundamental criteria againstwhich the appropriateness of all recommendations, operational decisions, and

actions for the park and parkway are to be tested. Rock Creek Park exists to:• Preserve and perpetuate for this and future generations

the ecological resources of the Rock Creek valley withinthe park in as natural a condition as possible, the archeological and historic resources in the park, and the scenicbeauty of the park. 

• Provide opportunities for the public to experience, understand, and appreciate the park in a manner appropriate

to the preservation of its natural and cultural resources.

• Provide opportunities for recreation appropriate to the

park’s natural and cultural resources.

The Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway exists to:• Connect Rock Creek Park and the National Zoological

Park (National Zoo) to Potomac Park with a scenic road.

• Prevent pollution and obstruction of Rock Creek.

Maryland

Virginia

Wheaton-Glenmont

Montgomery

Alexandria

ch Arlington

Adelphi

District of

Columbia

Boundary

ROCKCREEKAND POTOMACPARKWAY

ROCK CREEK

PARK Takoma Park

Silver Spring

an

Hillcrest Heights

Alexandria

Bailey’s Crossroads

Rock Creek

Regional Park MNCPPC College Park

GREENBELT

PARK

BALTIMORE

WASHINGTON

PARKWAY

ANACOSTIA

PARK

SUITLAND

PARKWAY

ONAL CAPITAL

KS-CENTRAL

Prince

Georges

595

495

495

95

495

295

395

66

50

16th Street

New York Ave.

Zoo

Connecticut Ave.

MunicipalityCountyMarylandVirginiaWaterDistrict of ColumbiaNational Park Service landsRock Creek Park-MNCPPC

REGIONROCK CREEK PARK / ROCKCREEK AND POTOMACPARKWAY • WASHINGTON, DCUnited States Department of the Interior • National Park ServiceDSC • April 2002 • 821 / 20042
3

an also includes several significance statements

importance to the nation’s natural and cultural

 help managers to make decisions that preserve

essary to the park’s purposes. The following sig

ize the important features of the park and park

one of the oldest and largest naturally managed

United States.

way contains approxi

of valuable plant and

viding protection for a

ecies within a heavily

compasses a rugged 

eptional scenic beauty

al landscapes and inti

 in contrast to the sur

of Washington, D.C.

s forests and open

the character of the

was

arly

ion

ment

tal,

ural

 the few tangible

s past.

s an oasis for urban

spite from the bustle

• The Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway is the

first federally constructed parkway and one ofthe best examples of early parkway design.

• The Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway provides a scenic gateway to the city’s monumental core.• Rock Creek

Park is a historic designedlandscapeincorporatingearly 20th century picturesqueand rustic features designed toenhance the visitors’ experienceof the naturalistic park scenery.

• Located in the heart of a densely

populated cosmopolitan area, RockCreek Park serves as an ambassador for the national park idea, providing outstanding opportunities for education, interpretation, and recreation to foster stew hardship of natural and cultural resources.

Servicewide Mandates and PoliciesAs with all NPS units, management of the park and parkway is guided bynumerous congressional acts and executive orders, in addition to the establishing legislation. Some of these laws and executive orders are applicableprimarily to units of the national park system. Others have broad application,such as the Endangered Species Act, the National Historic Preservation Act,and executive orders addressing the protection of wetlands and floodplains.The alternatives considered in the general management plan all incorporateand comply with the provisions of these mandates and policies. In additionto the approaches specified in the draft general management plan, theNational Park Service will strive to implement all of the servicewide mandates and policies in the park and parkway. As a result, the general management plan does not state, for instance, that the National Park Service will
4

red species, control invasive plants and animals,

ect archeological sites, preserve historic struc

r citizens with disabilities. 

 National Park Service in 1916. This act defines

ve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources

park system for the enjoyment, education, and

 generations.” Thus, any management actions in

ognize that preserving the natural and cultural

park is paramount, and that any visitor activities

, education, and inspiration” can occur only to

mpair the natural and cultural resources and val

tershed is outside of the park. Therefore, a key

ued coordination with other agencies throughout

tions in Rock Creek and its tributaries. This will

ons as supporting the Chesapeake Bay Program,

f Columbia Water and Sewer Authority to elimi

 sewage to the creek, either from pipe breaks or

 events from combined sanitary and storm sewer

pstream agencies and property owners to reduce

off.

supports more than 2 million recreational visits

residents of the Washington, D.C. metropolitan

 include the Rock Creek Nature Center and

irce Mill complex, the 4,200-seat Carter Barron

nine-hole golf courses, picnic areas, community

riding facilities, and sport fields. 

• Biking, jogging, walking, and in-line skating are popular activities on the park’s

roads and paved trails, particularly onweekends when several road segments areclosed to motorized vehicles. Driving forpleasure also occurs, particularly alongthe length of Beach Drive.

• The forests on the valley slopes

and ridge tops are used for hikingand provide opportunities forsolitude and nature study.

In addition, the park experiences almost12.4 million nonrecreational visits annually. These visits primarily are commuters using park roads and the parkway to travel to and from work.

Current Traffic Management Park roads were established to comply with theestablishing legislation’s instructions to “layout and prepare roadways . . . to be used fordriving.” Together, Beach Drive and theRock Creek and Potomac Parkway, whichrun alongside Rock Creek from theMaryland state line to Virginia Avenue, provide a north-south route that has become apopular commuting road. Weekday trafficon Beach Drive averages about 9,000 vehicles. Several park roads provide east-westroutes across the park. More than 95 percentof the vehicles entering the park during commuting hours pass through without stopping.Approximately 55,000 vehicles per day typically usethe busiest portion of the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway. The NationalPark Service manages traffic on weekdays by making the parkway one-wayinbound into the city during the morning rush-hour and one-way outboundfrom the city during the afternoon rush-hour.
5

ces include closing portions of Beach Drive and

d vehicles on weekends and holidays. These clo

portunities that are unmatched elsewhere in the

tan area, and are very popular with park visitors.

ives for future management of the park will con

nd and holiday road closures.

esource condition and visitor experience issues

 the general management plan. Decision points

c, park staff, and other agencies during scoping

 plan.

e to be resolved by this plan involves the use of

n weekdays. This issue includes determining the

ter traffic in Rock Creek Park and the degree to

e affected by such use. Two other key manage

ently limited ability to provide orientation, inter

rvices to visitors in the park, and the problems

d operations activities encounter at their present

es.

ues are summarized in three questions, called

n points helped define the management alterna

evaluated in this draft general management plan.

 managed in Rock Creek Park and on the Rock 

arkway?

ppropriate levels of service and locations for 

and education in the park?

propriate locations to support administration and

with respect to minimizing resource disturbance? 

Items not Covered in the General Management Plan The general management plan does not include the Carter BarronAmphitheater or the Rock Creek Tennis Stadium and adjoining playing fields.Management direction for the stadium area was established in 1995 in theFinal Environmental Impact Statement, Tennis Stadium, Rock Creek Park. The general management plan does not address concerns identified duringscoping that are already prescribed by law, regulation, or policy, or thatwould be in violation of such requirements. It also does not address issuesthat are at an operational or developmental level of detail. Such issues aremost appropriately associated with the park’s 5-year strategic plan or annual implementation plans. Those plans will be based on the resource conditions and visitor experiences to be achieved in the park and parkway that areestablished in the final general management plan. During scoping, the National Park Service received many suggestions forpark and parkway management that were not incorporated into any of thealternatives. Many of these suggestions related to traffic management.Others involved adding new facilities, removing existing facilities, or changing management policies. Descriptions of all of these suggestions and thereasons they were not incorporated into any of the alternatives are includedin the general management plan in the section entitled “Alternatives orActions Eliminated from Further Study.”Public ParticipationThe National Park Service considers the public a key participant in planningfor Rock Creek Park and the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway. Therefore,public involvement has been an important component of the planningprocess.The“Consultation and Coordination” section of the general management plan and environmental impact statement describes public participation to date. As described in the “Next Steps” section of this summary, theNational Park Service will continue to partner with the public to develop andimplement the plan for managing the park and parkway.

   
6

ions

veloped to provide different approaches for

nts. To design the alternatives, the National Park

ic scoping, and then screened a large number of

ning them based on public input. Following the

ternatives, the National Park Service identified

hat could implement the alternatives. 

riptions identified as potentially applicable to

ck Creek and Potomac Parkway are summarized

the high level of concern expressed by the pub

s, seven of the prescriptions apply to roads. The

nditions and visitor experiences for forests, cul

areas, visitor facilities, and administration and

ons identify how various parts of the park and

d. Each prescription is based on desired visitor

nditions, and the kinds of activities or facilities

would achieve the targeted conditions. 

tives

dy the range of what the public and the National

ccomplished with regard to visitor experience,

and cultural resource conditions. They are based

ditions on the ground, as expressed by the man

e park conditions and management within each

by placing the management prescriptions

map. Each alternative is a combination of sev

ons. None of the alternatives contains all of the

Instead, each consists only of those prescrip

for the park under that alternative.

In some cases, all four alternatives apply the same management prescriptionto the same area. For example, Fort DeRussy and the Godey Lime Kilns arewithin the Cultural Resource Zone in all four alternatives. This occursbecause this appears to be the most appropriate way to manage these facilities, regardless of the alternative selected for the park.The concepts associated with each alternative are described on the followingpages. Table 2 provides more details on the features of each alternative. 
7

Table 1: Summary of Management Prescriptions

Appropriate Activities

Visitor Experience and Resource Condition and Facilities

cape of forests on the Provides opportunities for exploration and contemplation of Activities include hiking and nature study. Fa

and ridge tops. the forest. Encounter frequency with other visitors is low to mod- cilities are mostly undeveloped, other than trails.

erate. Natural processes are mostly undisrupted.

key cultural resources Provides a sense of history. Encounter frequency with other Activities and facilities are compatible with 

significance and pur- visitors and park personnel is high. The integrity and ambiance cultural resource protection. Activities include 

ark. of cultural features are protected, documented, and interpreted. education and interpretation. Facilities include 

Natural resources are managed compatibly with cultural resource. cultural resources, which could be 

adaptively used.

d mowed areas along Provides motorized and nonmotorized access to the valley and Activities include motorized and nonmotorized

k and Piney Branch informal recreational areas. Encounter frequency with other visi- touring, nonrecreational traffic through or 

Provides scenic views tors is moderate to very high. Heavy urban traffic occurs on across the valley, and informal recreation such 

nd forested valley. weekdays. On weekends and holidays, motorized traffic is ex- as picnicking, nature study, and hiking. Facilicluded and nonmotorized recreation occurs. The landscape is ties include rustic picnic areas, paved trails, 

largely forested, but shoulders and grassy bays are maintained roadways, and traffic control devices.by mowing.

ley Floor Automobile Same as Valley Floor Automobile Access Zone. Same as Valley Floor Automobile Access Zone.

but with reduced traffic

peeds. 

orized traffic. Includes Provides a relaxed and unhurried experience where visitors enjoy Activities include nonmotorized recreation 

nd adjacent mowed natural sights, sounds, and smells, uninterrupted by motor vehicle such as walking, bicycling, in-line skating, and 

s scenic views of the traffic. Encounter frequency with other visitors is moderate to picnicking. Facilities include paved trails or 

sted valley. very high. Landscape is largely forested, but shoulders and grassy former road bed, rustic picnic areas, and interbays are maintained by mowing. pretive waysides.

orized traffic on week- During mid-weekday closures, same as the Valley Floor Non- Same as Valley Floor Automobile Access Zone.

9:30 a.m. and 3:30 motorized Recreation Zone. At all other times, same as the 

her times, is similar to Valley Floor Controlled Automobile Access Zone. 

or Controlled Auto

s Zone.
8

Table 1: Summary of Management Prescriptions (Continued)

Appropriate Activities

Visitor Experience and Resource Condition and Facilities

ped parkway that pro- Esthetically pleasing landscape provides a sense of decompres- Activities include motorized and nonmotorized

driving experience. sion and relaxation. Encounter frequency with other visitors is recreation such as driving, walking, bicycling, 

fields and woodlands high to very high. Heavy traffic is accepted. Natural and his- and in-line skating. Facilities include roadways

ty views. toric features are maintained, including parkway design. and paved trails.

cluding associated Provides motorized and nonmotorized park access. Encounter Activities include motorized and nonmotorized 

louts, parking areas, frequency with other visitors is high to very high. Visitors touring, with nonrecreational traffic across the

istoric bridges, and can have an unhurried drive or bicycle ride, despite heavy urban park. Facilities include roadways, paved trails,

ints. traffic at times. The surrounding landscape is forested, but shoulders and traffic control devices.

are maintained by mowing.

ne defined by facilities Visitors receive an introduction to park’s natural and cultural Activities include information, interpretation, 

n, interpretation, edu- history, and can obtain information on recreation opportunities. education, and other visitor services. Facilities

her visitor services. Encounter frequency with other visitors and park personnel is include buildings and waysides to support inhigh. Substantial maintenance and intervention are required to formation and interpretive activities; historic

accommodate concentrated visitor use. structures could be adaptively used.

reation facilities such as Provides developed facilities for recreation. High levels of inter- Activities include gardening, picnicking, tennis,

ommunity gardens, stables, vention and maintenance are required to support concentrated performances, golf, horseback riding, and

nd golf course. Background visitor use. Encounter frequency with other visitors is very high. informal sports. Facilities include developed

c and park-like. recreation features and structures.

ures and grounds used for Most visitors are unaware of this zone or its facilities. However, Activities include park administration and op

ation and operations. when necessary, visitors are able to locate facilities easily and find eration. Facilities include offices and mainten

them user friendly. Best management practices protect resources, ance yards; historic structures could be prevent pollution, and reduce noise and visual impacts. adaptively used.

NPS roads within the park Visitors experience the sights and sounds of urban traffic. En- Activities primarily include urban transporta

boundaries that provide counter frequency with other visitors is very high. tion; where possible, this zone links the park

he park and connections to local trails for nonmotorized recreation.

 street grid. Facilities include roadways and traffic control

devices.
9

Table 2: Summary of Key Features of the Alternatives

: Alternative B: Alternative C: Alternative D:

anagement of Continue Current Nonmotorized Recreation Mid-Weekday Recreation 

ark Uses Management/No Action Emphasis Enhancement

Valley Floor Con- Include in the Valley Floor Include northern portions in the Valley Include northern portions in the 

obile Access Zone. Automobile Access Zone. Floor Nonmotorized Recreation Zone. Mid-Weekday Recreation Zone.

Permanently close this zone to motor

kend closures of Continue weekend closures of ized vehicles and manage for non- Between rush-hours on weekdays, 

s road. sections of this road. motorized recreation. close this zone to motorized vehicles and manage for nonmotorized

recreation.

uring along the Allow auto touring along the Include the remainder in the Valley Floor Except during mid-weekday clo

h Drive on week- length of Beach Drive on weekdays Controlled Automobile Access Zone. sures, allow auto touring along the

urage slower speeds using current management Allow auto touring, but encourage slower length of Beach Drive on weekdays,

recreational vehicles. techniques. speeds and fewer nonrecreational but encourage slower speeds. 

vehicles.

OV-2 in the primary Continue weekend closures of 

avel during rush hours. sections of this road

-hour lane reversals. Continue current traffic man- End lane reversals and allow Same as Alternative A.

agement policies. two-way traffic at all times.

aved recreational trail. Provide maintenance as needed. Implement HOV-2 restrictions in the

primary direction of travel during rush-hours. 

ntersection of the park- Upgrade the paved recreational trail.

ch Drive near 

venue. Improve the intersection of the

parkway with Beach Drive near Connecticut Avenue.

r construct paved Continue current management Same as Alternative A. Same as Alternative A.

ails adjacent to roads. practices.

miles of trails. Maintain trails and provide Same as Alternative A. Same as Alternative A.

rehabilitation of deteriorated

trail segments.

Cultural Resource Zone. Include in the Visitor Facility Zone. Same as Alternative A. Same as Alternative A.

he mill to focus on his- Rehabilitate the mill to focus on 

g and land use in the history of milling and land use in the

ea. Rock Creek area.

he Peirce Mill Barn and Continue to lease the Peirce Mill Barn

erpretive and education to a non-profit organization.
10

Table 2: Summary of Key Features of the Alternatives (Continued)

: Alternative B: Alternative C: Alternative D:

anagement of Continue Current Nonmotorized Recreation Mid-Weekday Recreation 

ark Uses Management/No Action Emphasis Enhancement

Cultural Resource Zone. Include in the Administration/ Same as Alternative A. Same as Alternative A.

Operations Zone.

he buildings for adaptive 

e with park resource Continue to use for park admini

strative offices.

 Park Police D-3 Include in the Administration/ Same as Alternative A. Same as Alternative A.

of the structure. Operations Zone.

Visitor Facility Zone. Continue to use for U.S. Park Police 

D-3 substation.

isitor contact station to

rientation, information,

ion.

he nature center and Maintain current configuration. Same as Alternative A. Same as Alternative A.

rove effectiveness

rams.

lanetarium.

he Peirce-Klingle Mansion. Continue to use current space in the Same as Alternative A. Same as Alternative A.

rentially to commercial Peirce-Klingle Mansion.

utside the park, or to a new

constructed at the park

ard.

he Lodge House. Relocate Continue to use current space in Same as Alternative A. Same as Alternative A.

to commercial space out- the Lodge House.

or to a new substation con

 H-3 area.

w park police substation Continue current uses. Same as Alternative A. Same as Alternative A.

e commercial space

ained outside of the park.

he area. Construct new Continue current uses. Relocate Same as Alternative A. Same as Alternative A.

s only if suitable com- some administrative staff to

cannot be obtained existing facilities at this site. 

park.

$1,920,000 $13,429,000 $13,429,000 

r year $7,300,000 per year $8,178,000 per year $8,208,000 per year
11

ve visitor safety, better control traffic volumes

k, enhance interpretation and education opportu

of park resources, especially cultural resources.

he current scope of visitor uses. Details of this

Table 2 and the Alternative A map.

ve traffic management within the park and park

dway system would be retained and nonrecre

d be accommodated. However, to improve visitor

 visitor’s experience, traffic speeds and volumes

 to those that would occur if current management

 B). Alternative A also would:

and rehabilitate deteriorating segments.

e Mill complex to focus on the history of milling

ea, and rehabilitate the Peirce Mill Barn for use

education. 

istrative offices out of the Peirce-Klingle 

 Hill to commercial office space outside the 

ce facility that would be constructed at the park

aean Hill complex for adaptive use compatible 

Police substation out of the Lodge House on 

e Road to commercial space outside the park,

ce substation that would be constructed near the

lice H-3 stables.

ouse to a visitor contact station to provide park

on, and interpretation.

and the nature center and upgrade the planetari

iveness of public programs.

d Management of Established Park Uses

National

Zoo

Urban Transit ZoneCultural Resource ZoneVisitor Facility ZoneAdministration / Operations ZoneUrban Recreation ZonePark Road ZoneValley Floor Controlled Automobile Access ZoneRock Creek and Potomac Parkway ZoneForest ZoneRock Creek

ALTERNATIVE A



Improved Management of Established Park UsesDCS • April 2002 • 821 / 20053

BEACH DRIVE* Continue weekend closure

ROCK CREEK PARK

SHERRILL DRIVE* Continue weekend closure

Grove 10

LODGE HOUSE*Convert to visitor contact station

BEACH DRIVE*Manage as scenic two-waydrive*Reduce traffic volume andspeeds through enhanced enforcement, traffic calming, HOV*Continue weekend closures*Rehabilitate recreation trail and widen where practical

BEACH DRIVE / PARKWAYINTERSECTION*Redesign and rehabilitate for safety

ROCK CREEK AND

POTOMAC PARKWAY

*Continue rush-hour one-way traffic

*Reduce speeds through

speed enforcement

*Rehabilitate recreation trail

and widen where practical

ZOO TUNNEL

*Cooperate with Zoo for 24-hour

access to trail around tunnel

LINNAEAN HILL/

PEIRCE-KLINGE MANSION

*Preserve historic scene

*Move administrative offices

away from this location

*Adapt mansion for compatible use

PEIRCE MILL

*Preserve historic mill and scene

*Adapt Peirce Mill Barn

for interpretation

MAINTENANCE AREA

*Rehabilitate facilities and site

*Construct administrative facility if site

outside park is unavailable

NATURE CENTER

AND PLANETARIUM

*Rehabilitate and improve facility

U.S. PARK POLICE H-3 STABLES

*Construct new U.S. Park

Police D-3 Substation

if site outside park is unavailable

BINGHAM DRIVE

*Continue weekend closure

*Rehabilitate trail

OREGON AVENUE

*Rehabilitate trail

N

1000 0 100020003000Feet
12

nue the current management pattern into the

 action alternative” required by implementation

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Key features

ded in Table 2 and the Alternative B map.

 Creek Park and the Rock Creek and Potomac

ned as they have evolved thus far. There would

in resources management, visitor programs, or

aintenance. The current park road system would

ffic management would continue.

e Current Management/No Action

BEACH DRIVE

WISE ROAD * Continue weekend closure

ROCK CREEK PARK

SHERRILL DRIVE* Continue weekend closure

Grove 10

OREGON AVENUE

GOLFCOURSE

BINGHAM DRIVE

* Continue weekend closure

MILITARY ROAD

U.S. PARK POLICE H-3 STABLES

COMMUNITY GARDENS

FORT DERUSSY

NATURE CENTER ANDPLANETARIUM

MILITARY FIELD

HORSE CENTER

GRANT ROAD

MAINTENANCE AREA

GLOVER ROAD

LODGE HOUSEU.S. PARK POLICE SUBSTATION

MORROW DRIVE

ROSS DRIVE

BRIGHTWOOD RECREATIONAREA AND ROCK CREEK TENNIS STADIUM(outside GMP project area)

CARTER BARRONAMPHITHEATER

PINEY BRANCH PARKWAY

EQUITATION FIELD

PEIRCE MILL BLAGDEN AVE.

TENNISCOURTS

16TH STREET

17TH STREET

PORTER STREET/KLINGLE ROAD

CALVERT STREET

U.S. PARK POLICEEDGEWATER STABLES

COMMUNITY

GARDENS

PARK ROAD

LINNAEAN HILL/

PEIRCE-KLINGE MANSION

ZOO TUNNEL

CONNECTICUT

AVENUE

MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE

National

Zoo

Q STREET

P STREET

M STREET

PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE

GODEY LIME KILNS

THOMPSON

BOAT HOUSE

ROCK CREEK AND

POTOMAC PARKWAY Urban Transit Zone

Cultural Resource ZoneVisitor Facility ZoneAdministration / Operations ZoneUrban Recreation ZonePark Road ZoneValley Floor Automobile Access ZoneRock Creek and Potomac Parkway ZoneForest ZoneRock Creek

ALTERNATIVE BContinue Current Management/No ActionDCS • April 2002 • 821 / 20054

N

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 Feet
13

orized Recreation Emphasis

ss comments by members of the public who

ized recreation. Alternative C would eliminate

hern part of the park by closing three sections 

iles. These would be the same three segments

n weekends. It also would implement traffic

ng measures on roads in the southern portion 

kway. As shown in Table 2, the Alternative C

resources other than traffic would be the same

ternative A.

ad along portions of the Rock Creek valley floor

area as a quiet refuge from urban automobile 

motorized recreation throughout the week. This

ecome a destination, rather than a through drive,

 in keeping with the park’s natural and historic

uld convert the road into a paved trail available

ttle interference from automobile traffic through

connecting to the Potomac River, as envisioned

BEACH DRIVE* Close full time to autos between Wise Road and picnic grove #10

ROCK CREEK PARK

SHERRILL DRIVE* Continue weekend closure

LODGE HOUSE*Convert to visitor contactstation

BEACH DRIVE*Close full time to autosbetween Joyce Road andBroad Branch Road

BEACH DRIVE / PARKWAY INTERSECTION*Redesign and rehabilitate for safety

ROCK CREEK AND

POTOMAC PARKWAY

*Manage for full-time

two-way traffic

*Reduce traffic volume and

speeds through HOV and

speed enforcement

*Rehabilitate recreation trail

and widen where practical

ZOO TUNNEL

*Cooperate with Zoo for 24-hour

access to trail around tunnel

LINNAEAN HILL/

PEIRCE-KLINGE MANSION

*Preserve historic scene

*Move administrative offices

away from this location

*Adapt mansion for compatible use

PEIRCE MILL

*Preserve historic mill and scene

*Adapt Peirce Mill Barn for interpretation

MAINTENANCE AREA

*Rehabilitate facilities and site

*Construct administrative facility if site

outside park is unavailable

NATURE CENTER

AND PLANETARIUM

*Rehabilitate and improve facility

U.S. PARK POLICE H-3 STABLES

*Construct new U.S. Park

Police D-3 Substation

if site outside park is unavailable

BINGHAM DRIVE

*Continue weekend closure

*Rehabilitate trail

OREGON AVENUE

*Rehabilitate trail Grove 10

National

Zoo

BEACH DRIVE*Reduce traffic volume andspeeds through enhanced speed enforcement, traffic calming*Rehabilitate recreation trail and widen where practical

BEACH DRIVE

*Close full time to autos

between Maryland border

and West Beach Drive

WISE ROAD

ALTERNATIVE C



Nonmotorized Recreation EmphasisDCS • April 2002 • 821 / 20055

N

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 Feet

Section of Beach Drive for Nonmotorized UseUrban Transit ZoneCultural Resource ZoneVisitor Facility ZoneAdministration / Operations ZoneUrban Recreation ZonePark Road ZoneValley Floor Controlled Automobile Access ZoneValley Floor Nonmotorized Recreation ZoneRock Creek and Potomac  Parkway ZoneForest ZoneRock Creek
14

ekday Recreation Enhancement

d in response to a letter sent to the National Park

Washington, D.C. The mayor suggested “imple

r traffic restrictions on sections of upper Beach

ods.” The goals stated in the letter would include

c in the most sensitive portions of Rock Creek

 impact on surrounding neighborhoods and com

D would close three segments of Beach Drive in

park to motorized vehicles for a 6-hour period,

m. These would be the same segments that cur

ends. For the other 18 hours of each weekday,

eriods, traffic management would be similar to

fic-calming measures like those in Alternative A

eeds. As shown in Table 2, Alternative D would

n traffic in the same manner as Alternative A.

 as a compromise between traffic and nonmotor

h-hour periods, the alternative would attempt to

minimize the diversion of rush-hour traffic from

borhoods. Between rush-hour periods on week

motorized recreation and provide a quiet refuge

 area.

 change

ns, but

ized set

much of

park dur

kdays. It

ving for

of Beach

y during

ar times

gs. 

BEACH DRIVE*On weekdays, close to autosbetween rush-hours from WiseRoad to picnic grove #10*Continue weekend closure

ROCK CREEK PARK

SHERRILL DRIVE* Continue weekend closure

LODGE HOUSE*Convert to visitor contactstation

BEACH DRIVE*On weekdays, close toautos between rush-hoursfrom Joyce Road toBroad Branch Road*Continue weekend closure

ROCK CREEK AND

POTOMAC PARKWAY

*Continue rush-hour one-way traffic

*Reduce speeds through

speed enforcement

*Rehabilitate recreation trail

and widen where practical

ZOO TUNNEL

*Cooperate with Zoo for 24-hour

access to trail around tunnel

LINNAEAN HILL/

PEIRCE-KLINGE MANSION

*Preserve historic scene

*Move administrative offices

away from this location

*Adapt mansion for compatible use

PEIRCE MILL

*Preserve historic mill and scene

*Adapt Peirce Mill Barn

for interpretation

MAINTENANCE AREA

*Rehabilitate facilities and site

*Construct administrative facility if site

outside park is unavailable

NATURE CENTER

AND PLANETARIUM

*Rehabilitate and improve facility

U.S. PARK POLICE H-3 STABLES

*Construct new U.S. Park

Police D-3 Substation

if site outside park is unavailable

BINGHAM DRIVE

*Continue weekend closure

*Rehabilitate trail

OREGON AVENUE

*Rehabilitate trail Grove 10

National

Zoo

BEACH DRIVE

*On weekdays, close to

autos between rush-hours from

border to West Beach Drive

*Continue weekend closure WISE ROAD

ALTERNATIVE D



Mid-Weekday Recreation EnhancementDCS • April 2002 • 821 / 20056

N

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 Feet

Section of Beach Drive for Nonmotorized UseUrban Transit ZoneCultural Resource ZoneVisitor Facility ZoneAdministration / Operations ZoneUrban Recreation ZonePark Road ZoneValley Floor Controlled Automobile Access ZoneValley Floor Mid-Weekday Recreation ZoneRock Creek and Potomac  Parkway ZoneForest ZoneRock Creek

BEACH DRIVE / PARKWAY INTERSECTION*Rehabilitate for safety

BEACH DRIVE*Reduce traffic speedsthrough enhanced speedenforcement and traffic-calming measures*Rehabilitate recreation trail and widen where practical
15

e Alternatives 

he no action alternative, would continue current

erences of the other three alternatives compared

tices are highlighted below.

d continue weekday auto touring throughout the

plement measures to encourage slower speeds

ber of nonrecreational vehicles. This alternative

high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) restrictions on

g rush-hour periods in the primary travel direc

d permanently close selected segments of Beach 

ad Branch Road to automobiles and would pro

recreation in this area. Other park roads would

ourage slower speeds and reduce the number of

icles.

and Potomac Parkway, Alternative C would end

llow two-way traffic at all times. This alternative 

OV restrictions during rush-hours in the primary

he traffic.

art of each weekday, Alternative D would close

Drive north of Broad Branch Road to motorized

ontinue auto touring throughout the park at all

kdays. Traffic-calming measures would reduce

ive D would not include HOV restrictions.

uld be upgraded under Alternatives A, C, and D.

nd D would increase the use of park historic 

retive and educational purposes. These alterna

current use of the Peirce Mill Barn as an art 

 an interpretive and education facility to support

he mill. They also would move the park admin

of the Peirce-Klingle Mansion at the Linnaean

ex and provide adaptive use of the buildings.

• Alternatives A, C, and D would improve park introduction and information services by such measures as converting the Lodge House to

a visitor contact station and upgrading the nature center and planetarium.

• Alternatives A, C, and D would address the problems associated

with park administrative facilities by finding a new location, preferably in commercial space outside the park, for the park’s administrative offices; relocating the D-3 U.S. Park Police substation tocommercial space outside of the park or a new facility at the H-3site; and improving the use of the park maintenance area.

   
16

nment

 uses the term “impact topics” to refer to the

e in the planning process. Impact topics are used

ss and the assessment of potential consequences

onal Park Service identified impact topics for the

/ Environmental Impact Statement: Rock Creek

nd Potomac Parkway based on their recognition

re:

ng legislation for the park or the parkway;

g the significance and character of the park;

ant by laws or regulations; or

blic during scoping for the general management

Table 3 shows the criteria that helped establish each impact topic as appropriate for consideration in the general management plan and environmentalimpact statement.The “Affected Environment” section of the general management plan andenvironmental impact statement characterizes each of these impact topics.The intent was not to provide complete information on all aspects of theseimpact topics in the park. Instead, the “Affected Environment” sectionfocused on those aspects of each impact topic that could be affected by thealternatives.One of the primary concerns in the park and along the parkway is traffic.Traffic congestion in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area has been calledthe second worst in the nation. During the morning and evening commutingperiods, traffic levels on arterial roadways in the vicinity of the park andparkway typically meet or exceed their capacities. These conditions alsooccur within the park and parkway, where several intersections routinely failor function poorly during the commuting periods.

Table 3: Criteria Used to Establish Each Impact Topic

Cited in Critical to Park Recognized Cited

Establishing Significance by Laws or During

Impact Topic Legislation and Character Regulations ScopingAir quality 3 3Rock Creek and its tributaries 3 3 3 3Wetlands and floodplains 3 3Deciduous forests 3 3 3 3Protected and rare species 3 3Other native wildlife 3 3 3 3Cultural resources, including ar- 3 3 3cheological resources, historic structures, and cultural landscapesTraditional park character and 3 3 3visitor experienceLocal and regional transportation 3Community character 3
17

Consequences

statement portion of the general management

of each alternative on each impact topic. The

wing steps.

lations and policies that were applicable to each 

ods that were used to conduct the analysis. This 

lative terms such as “minor” or “major” effects 

and establishing timeframes for long-term and 

ysis both for the park and parkway and in a more

determine cumulative impacts. The analyses 

conditions that would occur with changes in 

atives A, C, and D, commonly called the “action

ditions that would occur if current management

(Alternative B, the “no action alternative”).

re summarized in Table 4. Complete information

he general management plan / environmental

tal consequences found that all four alternatives

fects on air quality, the water quality and hydrol

tributaries, wetlands and floodplains, deciduous

are species. These findings would be expected,

ndate to protect these resources and the develop

m decision points that focus on traffic manage

and education, and effective administration and

s on natural resources would occur. However,

ns, none of the differences to natural resources

d be major. 

In the area of traditional park character and visitor experience, the improvededucation and interpretation facilities included in Alternatives A, C, and Dwould provide greater opportunities for the public to learn about and experience the park’s natural and cultural resources, compared to Alternative B.The action alternatives would also enhance the efficiency of park administration and improve police services.The greatest benefits to nonmotorized recreation would be associated withAlternative C. However, Alternative C would eliminate the traditional visitor experience of automobile touring along the length of the park, includingthe gorge area, which would be a major adverse effect on traditional parkcharacter and visitor experience. Park roads designed as historic also are considered a cultural resource. Byclosing them to motorized traffic, Alternative C would modify the designfeatures that define their significance.Cultural resources would be the only impact topic where one or more of thealternatives could cause irreversible and irretrievable losses of resources.Under the three action alternatives, the disturbance of sites in associationwith new construction could result in some irreversible and irretrievable lossof archeological or historic resources.The traffic management measures of all three action alternatives would produce major improvements in visitor safety. Most of the improvements wouldbe associated with the implementation of engineered traffic-calmingdevices, which would reduce vehicle speeds and the associated frequencyand severity of accidents. 
18

are used by traffic engineers to measure and 

Several impact topics, including traditional park

rience, regional and local transportation, and 

are affected by traffic levels. For Alternatives A,

se impact topics were determined by comparing

e in the year 2020 with the LOS that would occur

mplementation of Alternative B. 

d produce 2020 conditions similar (no differ

hose in Alternative B. This result was expected,

was designed to minimize effects both on rush

ghborhoods.

ction alternatives, improvements in LOS within

noticeable to major. Effects would include a 40

 average daily traffic through the gorge area with

he elimination of automobile traffic on most of

of Broad Branch Road with Alternative C. 

 of one LOS) improvements in traffic would

f the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway with 

C. 

 Alternative A would provide noticeable to major

 on four road segments. Two road segments

ably degraded LOS, with associated adverse

ty character. There would not be a disproportion

 to disadvantaged areas or ethnic neighborhoods.

 eight road segments outside of the park would 

 traffic and community character of improved 

ad segments would have decreased LOS with 

ffects on traffic and community character. There

roportionate routing of traffic to disadvantaged 

hborhoods.

workdays, Alternatives C and D would have sim

 that would use park roads under Alternative B

wever, nearby streets and intersections would be

operating well below their capacities during the mid-day period, even in theyear 2020. While the diverted mid-day traffic would be perceptible on somecity streets, it would not cause any changes in levels of service or in trafficrelated community character.With regard to the first decision point, Alternatives A, C, and D would substantially reduce automobile traffic in the park compared to Alternative B. 

• Alternative A would accomplish this by implementing traffic-reducing and traffic-calming measures while maintaining the roads as part

of the city’s transportation system throughout weekdays. 

• Alternative C would permanently remove some segments of Beach 

Drive from the city’s motorized vehicle grid, and would implementtraffic-reducing and traffic-calming measures in other areas. 

• Alternative D would implement traffic-calming measures, and would

also close sections of Beach Drive to motorized traffic during themiddle part of each weekday.
19

ion point, the levels of service for visitor inter

ould be equally improved under the identical

C, and D. This would be accomplished by mov

ations functions out of historic buildings and by

er historic and educational structures. For the

tives A, C, and D would provide the same level

 to Alternative B by moving administration and

odern facilities.

ics, the action alternatives would produce bene

and cultural resources of the park and parkway.

asis, these alternatives would have only small

would be overshadowed by the adverse effects

pulation growth and development in the water

ess of the management actions taken by the

c in the region will continue to increase. 

tant for the National Park Service to continue to

ns, such as the Chesapeake Bay Program and the

tigation, which includes reestablishing migratory

 addition, the improved education programs that

der the action alternatives could provide some 

ficial effects by improving public awareness of

d encouraging improved stewardship by citizens

park and parkway.

nd Environmentally Preferred

vironmental impact statements require that the

ntified in the draft environmental impact state

aker has no preference. Each of the action alter

fter careful consideration, the National Park

ve D as the preferred alternative. Alternative D

est use of the park and would represent the best

ce protection, enhancing recreational opportuni

itional visitor experience of automobile touring

The environmentally preferred alternative would best promote the nationalenvironmental policy expressed in the National Environmental Policy Act.This alternative would cause the least damage to the biological and physicalenvironment, and best protect, preserve, and enhance historical, cultural, andnatural resources.The National Environmental Policy Act identifies six criteria to be used tohelp determine the environmentally preferred alternative. These criteria werelisted in the general management plan / environmental impact statement, andthe four alternatives were evaluated using the criteria. The analysis showedthat Alternative D is environmentally preferred by a close margin. 

   
20

Table 4: Summary of Impacts of the Alternatives

Alternative B: Alternative C: Alternative D:

agement of Continue Current Nonmotorized Recreation Mid-Weekday Recreation 

k Uses Management/No Action Emphasis Enhancement

r quality because rerouted traffic Effects would be similar to Effects would be the same as Alter- Effects would be similar to 

he airshed. Alternative A because the native A. Although Alternative C Alternative A because the 

same traffic volume would would reroute traffic that currently same traffic volume would

 levels would be below air remain within the airshed. uses Beach Drive, no traffic would remain within the airshed.

be diverted to outside of the airshed.

ne status would not be affected.

 practices would ensure that

ruction would be negligible.

r irretrievable or irreversible

sources.

st management practices (BMPs) The application of BMPs to park Elimination of automobile traffic Elimination of automobile traffic 

wn to be contributing pollutants areas known to be contributing on portions of Beach Drive, and on portions of Beach Drive during

neficial, long-term, measurable pollutants would produce beneficial, reduced traffic on other park roads mid-weekdays would slightly reduce

uality. long-term measurable effects on would slightly reduce pollutant pollutant loadings in Rock Creek.

water quality. loadings in Rock Creek.

veral sites would produce Other effects would be the same as

e, short-term effects on Continued inter-agency measures to Other effects would be the same as Alternative A.

hydrology. maintain and improve sanitary and Alternative A.

combined sewer systems would 

ile traffic on roads adjacent to produce beneficial, long-term, major

 have a beneficial, long-term, effects on water quality. Coordination

surable effect on water quality. could also produce beneficial, longterm, major reductions in streambed

of the public could help reduce alterations such as scour and

t loadings and storm water flows. sedimentation.

gency measures to maintain No impairment, or irretrievable or 

ary and combined sewer systems irreversible commitment of resources.

neficial, long-term, major effects

Coordination could also produce

rm, major reductions in streambed

s scour and sedimentation.

r irretrievable or irreversible

sources.

permanent adverse effects would No effects would occur. Wetlands and Effects would be the same as Effects would be the same as 

 Better education of the public on floodplains would continue to be pro- Alternative A. Alternative A.

l upstream storm water runoff tected in conformance with Executive 

ands. Orders 11990 and 11988, respectively.

 adverse effects on floodplains No impairment, or irretrievable or 

 widening of some trails along irreversible commitment of resources.

ts would be controlled using BMPs.

or irretrievable or irreversible 

esources.
21

Table 4: Summary of Impacts of the Alternatives (Continued)

Alternative B: Alternative C: Alternative D:

gement of Continue Current Nonmotorized Recreation Mid-Weekday Recreation 

k Uses Management/No Action Emphasis Enhancement

nt practices would continue Current management practices would Effects would be the same as Effects would be the same as 

duous forest. continue to protect deciduous forests. Alternative A. Alternative A.

ut a half acre of forested land Erosion problems along heavily used

area would be a long-term or improperly designed trails would 

ct on the deciduous forest. continue and probably worsen.

 5 acres of forest for a trail No impairment, or irretrievable or 

would be a minor short-term, irreversible commitment of resources

rrently on steep slopes, erosion

n zones, or rare biotic commun

ajor, long-term, beneficial effect.

irretrievable or irreversible com

es.

on of endangered amphipods could The National Park Service would Effects would be the same as Effects would be the same as 

plementing more active protection. continue to protect rare species and Alternative A. Alternative A.

their supporting habitats.

n and interpretation may increase

iation for these species and lead No impairment, or irretrievable or 

 outside of the park. irreversible commitment of resources.

irretrievable or irreversible

ources.

nt practices would continue Current management practices would Closure of portions of Beach Drive Closure of portions of Beach Drive 

ildlife. continue to protect native wildlife in to motorized traffic would further to motorized traffic during midthe park. reduce the number of terrestrial wildlife weekdays would reduce the number 

adverse effects from trail widening roadkills compared to Alternative A. The of terrestrial wildlife roadkills, 

would be controlled using BMPs. No impairment, or irretrievable or effect would be beneficial but negligible especially for species that are 

irreversible commitment of resources. for all wildlife species. active during the day. The effect 

eeds and volumes would reduce would be beneficial but negligible 

beneficial effect. For most species, Other effects would be the same as for all wildlife species.

 negligible. Effects on box turtles Alternative A.

. Effects on gray fox would be Other effects would be the same as

Alternative A.

f the public on the adverse effects

les or removing them from the park

moderate, long-term, beneficial effect

irretrievable or irreversible

ources.
22

Table 4: Summary of Impacts of the Alternatives (Continued)

Alternative B: Alternative C: Alternative D:

gement of Continue Current Nonmotorized Recreation Mid-Weekday Recreation 

k Uses Management/No Action Emphasis Enhancement

erse effect would occur because Current incremental degradation of Effects would be the same as Effects would be the same as 

Service would relocate any facilities sites and features would continue. Alternative A. Alternative A.

potentially NRHP-eligible sites.

ng and improved visitor education

otential for non-construction-related

 effects.

 sites could result in some irretriev

e loss of archeological resources.

ficial impact would occur to the Historic structures and cultural land- Effects would be the same as Effects would be the same as 

Peirce-Klingle Mansion, and Lodge scapes would be protected, preserved, Alternative A. Alternative A.

ld be rehabilitated to preserve and interpreted in a manner consistent 

y significant features and would with NPS policies.

nce with park resource values.

ficial impact would occur to his

mprovements or rehabilitation

ir integrity and preservation.

he significant cultural landscape

utes of the Linnaean Hill and

would enhance park preservation

anding of park’s historic settings.

 sites during new construction

e irretrievable and irreversible

racter and appearance of the The traditional character and appear- The elimination of the traditional visitor The traditional character and 

ange. ance of the park would not change. experience of automobile touring along appearance of the park would 

the length of the park, including the gorge not change.

eation and transportation Park visitors would be adversely area, would be a major adverse impact.

commodated. affected by escalating nonrecreational Automobile touring along the

traffic in the park and on the parkway. Alternative C would provide the greatest length of the park would be main

uring rush-hours would incon- benefits to nonmotorized recreation and tained during weekday rush-hours,

ational visitors who do not carpool. Visitor safety would likely decrease transit by providing a bike trail through evenings, and nights.

as traffic increased. the valley with little interference from

ent in visitor safety would occur motorized traffic. Nonmotorized recreation and transit

affic volumes and slower Some exhibits would continue to be would be enhanced by providing a bike

inaccurate, worn, and dated. A major improvement in visitor safety trail with little interference from motorwould occur because of lower traffic ized traffic through the valley during

n and interpretation facilities would No impairment, or irretrievable or volumes and slower traffic speeds. mid-weekday closure periods.

portunities to learn about and exper- irreversible commitment of resources.

tural and cultural resources.
Table 4: Summary of Impacts of the Alternatives (Continued)

 Alternative B: Alternative C: Alternative D:

nagement of Continue Current Nonmotorized Recreation Mid-Weekday Recreation 

ark Uses Management/No Action Emphasis Enhancement

ce would be enhanced by increased Alternative C would provide the greatest Safety would be improved by

rk administration and improved police increase in safety through its traffic-calming traffic-calming measures and 

and traffic-reducing measures, and by during mid-day closures, providing permanent trails to separate visitors when visitors participating in 

or irretrievable or irreversible participating in nonmotorized recreation from nonmotorized recreation

resources. automobiles throughout the length of the could be separated from autovalley. mobiles throughout the length 

of the valley.

Other effects would be the same asAlternative A. Time demands for erecting

or removing barriers wouldlimit the availability of parkpolice for other activities.Other effects would be thesame as Alternative A.

 traffic would be substantially reduced During peak morning and evening hours, Nonrecreational traffic would be eliminated During rush-hours, traffic 

h of Bingham Drive. Nonmotorized traffic would be very heavy or worse on 57 or substantially reduced in the park. Non- speeds would be reduced in 

enhanced. percent of modeled road segments. Only 44 motorized travel would be enhanced. the park and on the parkway 

percent of these segments had these con- by traffic-calming measures.

 and speeds would be reduced in the park ditions in 1990. During the morning peak-hour, 15 road 

way, increasing visitor safety. segments would have noticeable to con- Other rush-hour conditions 

Continued conflicts would occur between siderable improvements in LOS. Five road would be similar to those in 

cy vehicles would have to use alternate recreational and nonrecreational users of segments would have noticeable to consider- Alternative B.

OV restrictions. park roads. able declines.

During mid-weekday clo

 peak-hour, 13 segments would have During the evening peak-hour, 11 segments sures, Nonrecreational traffic

ajor improvements in level of service. would have noticeable to considerable im- would be eliminated or sub

would have noticeable LOS declines. provements. Nine segments would have stantially reduced in the park.

noticeable to considerable declines. Nonmotorized travel would

ing peak-hour, nine segments would have be enhanced.

nsiderable improvements in LOS. Two Other effects would be the same as

 have noticeable LOS declines. Alternative A.

munity character resulting from park Changes in community character from park Eight segments would experience noticeably Except during mid-day 

ent would be minor compared to traffic management would be minor com- improved community characteristics associ- closures on weekdays, effects 

uld result from increased traffic assoc- pared to changes from increased traffic ated with lower traffic levels during one or would be the same as 

nal population growth. associated with regional population growth. both of the peak-hours on weekdays. Alternative B.

ents outside of the park would have Recreational opportunities and access to the Nine road segments would experience a notice- During the middle portion of

ges in community character, ranging park would continue to be compromised by able to considerable decline during one or both weekdays, opportunities for

rovements to noticeable adverse effects. traffic congestion. of the peak-hours on weekdays. nonmotorized recreation

would be enhanced, benefi

ents and traffic control would improve Opportunities for nonmotorized recreation ting citizens who use the park

creation, benefiting citizens who use the would be enhanced, benefiting citizens who and nearby trails for these

cinity for these purposes. use the park and nearby trails for these purposes.

purposes.

ustice: No disproportionate routing of Environmental justice: No

antaged areas or ethnic neighborhoods. Environmental justice: No disproportionate disproportionate routing of

routing of traffic to disadvantaged areas or traffic to disadvantaged areasethnic neighborhoods. or ethnic neighborhoods.Other effects would be the same as Alternative A.

23
24

copy of the draft general management plan

 statement?

y the highlights of the draft general manage

al impact statement. If you want to review the

ding copies are available from several sources,

 NPS offices.

 be reviewed and downloaded from the NPS’

nning.nps.gov/plans.cfm). This site can also be

rom the Rock Creek Park web site

 copies are available from the National Park

ested by calling 202/282-1063 or by writing to: 

ock Creek Park 

 NW

-1207

owing libraries in the region. You may want to

he availability of the document. 

pherd Park Library

brary

Memorial Library

ry

ibrary
25

ngs?

ervice will be holding public meetings in the

ach meeting, the National Park Service will sum

ment plan and environmental impact statement

comments on the document. Written comments

h meeting.

 included in the letter that was inserted in this sum

cations of public meetings will be available on the

site at http://www.nps.gov/rocr/dgmp/home.htm.

eetings also will be published in local and regional

meeting, can I still comment on the plan?

 be accepted for 90 days following publication

y of the general management plan and environ

the Federal Register. Written comments can be

ock Creek Park 

 NW

-1207

comments sent via the internet from the Rock

//www.nps.gov/rocr/dgmp/home.htm 

onically via e-mail by sending comments to:

mment, please include your name and street

this document, you can call Adrienne Coleman,

/282-1063.
ments?

oral comments from public meetings and written

 Each comment will be reviewed to determine if

e changes will be made to the alternatives and

ent in response to the comments. The final gen

nvironmental impact statement will include the

o written and oral substantive comments.

efined as comments that:

n the accuracy of information in the document;n the accuracy of the environmental analysis;

alternatives other than those presented in the

visions in the proposal.

ainst the proposed action or alternatives, or that

NPS policy, are not considered substantive and

mment period ends?

will select a preferred alternative and prepare the

lan and environmental impact statement, includ

ntive comments. A notice of availability of the

ed in the Federal Register and will be mailed to

py of, or who commented on, the draft plan and

ment.

ice of availability publication, the National Park

f its final decision. Thereafter, the National Park

ment the selected action. 

26

   
cipal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has the responsibility for most of our nationally owned

tural resources. This includes fostering sound use of our land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, and

 preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places; and providing for the

rough outdoor recreation. The department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to ensure that their

he best interests of all our people by encouraging stewardship and citizen participation in their care. The depart

or responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under

02
TATES

THE INTERIOR

K SERVICE

Rock Creek Park 

dent

g Lane NW

20008-1207

FIRST-CLASS MAIL

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

PERMIT NO. G-83