2013 FEASIBILITY STUDY MAPS AND SCENARIOS
The map below, Figure ES-1 from the NPS feasibility study, identifies five potential development sites (A through E). Below that map are the study's three scenarios for High, Medium and Low Density development, each with a link to a corresponding scenario map.
Site A is the wooded area within the C&O Canal NHP that was proposed for Georgetown University's massive private boathouse as the "preferred alternative" in the Environmental Assessment of 2006. Site B is occupied by the Washington Canoe Club. Site C, sometimes known as the Dempsey site, is the part of the C&O Canal NHP that lies between the Washington Canoe Club and the Alexandria Aqueduct. Sites D and E are not part of the canal park.
Site A is the wooded area within the C&O Canal NHP that was proposed for Georgetown University's massive private boathouse as the "preferred alternative" in the Environmental Assessment of 2006. Site B is occupied by the Washington Canoe Club. Site C, sometimes known as the Dempsey site, is the part of the C&O Canal NHP that lies between the Washington Canoe Club and the Alexandria Aqueduct. Sites D and E are not part of the canal park.
Development Scenario 1, High Density-The high-density development scenario assumes that the largest reasonable building would be developed on Sites A, C, D and E. Site B, occupied by the Washington Canoe Club, would undergo site restoration and rehabilitation of the structure. Site A, which has a maximum allowable footprint of 18,186 square feet, cannot be developed to its maximum capacity without adversely impacting adjacent historic and cultural resources, including the Washington Canoe Club, the C&O Canal levee and towpath, and the view from multiple vantage points of the forested shoreline west of the Alexandria Aqueduct. A building on Site A that is in scale with the Washington Canoe Club could be a reasonable structure in this setting, but because of access issues, the site would best accommodate storage and launch facilities for only canoes, kayaks and single rowing sculls for individual use. A structure on Site C could be designed to address site constraints by developing two separate storage bays at ground level that flank a shared apron. This configuration would permit existing sewer access structures to be integrated into the design of the apron to maintain access. Upper levels of the structure could bridge the shared apron to permit the maximum allowable floor area for other program elements. Large boathouses could be developed on Sites D and E and could accommodate two collegiate programs and most high school programs and provide sufficient space for other activities such as rowing tanks, erg rooms, meeting and locker rooms, and caretaker quarters on upper levels. In the context of the urban and industrial character of the nonmotorized boathouse zone east of the Alexandria Aqueduct, multistory buildings would have limited visual impact on the historic and cultural resources within the nonmotorized boathouse zone. In this scenario, Site D includes adjacent private lots. Site access restrictions and space constraints preclude on-site parking in this scenario; it would be necessary to provide off-site parking. [See High Density Map (pdf)]
Development Scenario 2, Medium Density-The medium-density development scenario assumes that the largest reasonable building would be developed on Sites A, D, and E. Sites B and C, which are occupied by the Washington Canoe Club and the Capital Crescent Trail would undergo site restoration and rehabilitation of the structure. A building on Site A that is in scale with the Washington Canoe Club could be a reasonable structure in this setting, but because of access issues, the site would best accommodate storage and launch facilities for only canoes, kayaks and single rowing sculls for individual use. Site A could be developed as an expansion of the operation of the Washington Canoe Club structure with parking and drop-off provided on Site C for both sites. Large boathouses could be developed on Site D and Site E to provide ground floor boat storage and more program options such as rowing tanks, ergometer rooms, meeting and locker rooms, and caretaker quarters on upper floors. In the context of the urban and industrial character of the nonmotorized boathouse zone east of the Alexandria Aqueduct, multistory buildings would have limited visual impact on the historic and cultural resources within the nonmotorized boathouse zone. Parking for structures on Sites D and E would need to be provided off site. [See Medium Density Map (pdf)]
Development Scenario 3, Low Density-The low-density development scenario assumes that a new facility would be built on Site E. Sites A, B and C would retain existing facilities and forest cover, and could be enhanced with amenities that are compatible to the greatest extent with the sensitive natural, historic, and cultural resources within the C&O Canal NHP. Existing operations, property ownership, and tree cover would be retained on Site D, and additional storage for canoes, kayaks and single rowing sculls would be integrated into the existing site in place of parking. A structure consistent in height with nearby buildings could be developed on Site E and could accommodate a collegiate program and several high school teams or both universities. The maximum building on this site would have limited visual impact in the context of the urban and industrial character of the nonmotorized boathouse zone east of the Alexandria Aqueduct. [See Low Density Map (pdf)]
[The scenarios are from p. ii of the NPS feasibility study; Fig. ES-1 is from p. iv. In the pdf version, these are pp. 6 and 8.]
Development Scenario 2, Medium Density-The medium-density development scenario assumes that the largest reasonable building would be developed on Sites A, D, and E. Sites B and C, which are occupied by the Washington Canoe Club and the Capital Crescent Trail would undergo site restoration and rehabilitation of the structure. A building on Site A that is in scale with the Washington Canoe Club could be a reasonable structure in this setting, but because of access issues, the site would best accommodate storage and launch facilities for only canoes, kayaks and single rowing sculls for individual use. Site A could be developed as an expansion of the operation of the Washington Canoe Club structure with parking and drop-off provided on Site C for both sites. Large boathouses could be developed on Site D and Site E to provide ground floor boat storage and more program options such as rowing tanks, ergometer rooms, meeting and locker rooms, and caretaker quarters on upper floors. In the context of the urban and industrial character of the nonmotorized boathouse zone east of the Alexandria Aqueduct, multistory buildings would have limited visual impact on the historic and cultural resources within the nonmotorized boathouse zone. Parking for structures on Sites D and E would need to be provided off site. [See Medium Density Map (pdf)]
Development Scenario 3, Low Density-The low-density development scenario assumes that a new facility would be built on Site E. Sites A, B and C would retain existing facilities and forest cover, and could be enhanced with amenities that are compatible to the greatest extent with the sensitive natural, historic, and cultural resources within the C&O Canal NHP. Existing operations, property ownership, and tree cover would be retained on Site D, and additional storage for canoes, kayaks and single rowing sculls would be integrated into the existing site in place of parking. A structure consistent in height with nearby buildings could be developed on Site E and could accommodate a collegiate program and several high school teams or both universities. The maximum building on this site would have limited visual impact in the context of the urban and industrial character of the nonmotorized boathouse zone east of the Alexandria Aqueduct. [See Low Density Map (pdf)]
[The scenarios are from p. ii of the NPS feasibility study; Fig. ES-1 is from p. iv. In the pdf version, these are pp. 6 and 8.]
