Since we're obviously getting no leadership from "leaders" like Frank Wolf on the Metro to Dulles debacle, how about columnists for the Washington Post? For instance, Marc Fisher totally gets it (my comments follow in italics):
So, if the feds really do stop the flow of dollars to the Dig to Dulles, what next? What can the state do?At this point, taking a year or two "pause" in order to get this crucial $5 billion infrastructure right for Virginia is definitely a good idea. Don't panic, don't rush this thing, and don't do it wrong in the haste to do anything!* A pause of a year or two might be good for the project's future -- if the Democrats regain the presidency. Simpson is no enemy of mass transit: He just approved more than a billion bucks for New York City's Second Avenue subway project, an undertaking every bit as massive as Metro's Dulles extension. But a transit-friendly Democrat in the White House probably would be more aggressive about making sure Metro finds a path to a new rail line.
* Advocates for bus rapid transit will jump to the fore, and there might even be a resurgence of interest in light rail. Both modes are vastly cheaper than heavy rail, and both have avid fans in the transportation biz.Why NOT look at all alternatives to heavy rail? What's the goal here, anyway? Is it to get people to and from the airport most efficiently? At the lowest cost? With "smart growth" benefits along the way? Or is it to increase property values for major land owners in the corridor? Hopefully, it's not the latter option; if not, we should be considering Metro alongside other possibilities to move comparable numbers of people in comfort, convenience, and cost-effectiveness to and from Dulles Airport.
* Ditch Bechtel. The company that last week agreed to shell out $352 million to settle claims against its botched work on Boston's Big Dig tunnel project is also one of the two big companies that make up Dulles Transit Partners, which got the contract to design and build the rail line. The feds don't mention Bechtel in their letter, but they express deep concern about likely cost overruns and delays, an echo of the horrific experience in Massachusetts.I've also addressed this issue ad nauseum. Bechtel's a disaster, but even worse is the whole idea of "no-bid" contracts. Open this thing up, and let's get the best deal for the taxpayers -- us, in other words!
* Bag the airports authority. The feds did get specific about their doubts that the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, which the state chose to run the Dulles rail construction process, has the experience needed to control the costs and schedule of such a complex project.Dumping the airports authority (MWAA) is a no-brainer, given the total conflict of interest there (MWAA will directly benefit from construction of a rail line to Dulles Airport, but could care less how much taxpayers fork over for it, how it affects development in Tysons Corner, etc.). Also, Marc Fisher makes a good point - what on earth does an AIRPORT AUTHORITY know about running a RAILROAD?!? In sum, it's high time to get MWAA out of the picture here.
* Give Metro the dedicated funding stream it desperately needs. Metro has no steady source of money for capital projects and operational costs. "Metro -- unlike all other major systems -- remains uniquely dependent on annual operating subsidies from its member jurisdictions as well as revenue it generates internally from passenger fares, advertising and parking," the Brookings Institution's Robert Puentes writes.I've addressed the issue of fixing Metro first BEFORE proceeding with any extensions to the system. As I wrote Saturday, "It almost seems to go without saying that "doing it right" should involve ensuring that the new "Silver Line" meshes with the existing Metro system." Now that we have a brief "cooling off" period, let's take the time to address this issue.
Seriously though, he's nailed all the points. With great ease. How come it's so difficult for our current leaders to see the same thing?
Eventually they are going to have to react to the events of the day.
Thus at the meeting they had presentations from various people having to do with smart growth, density, and all that, and all of the talk was very generic.
However, the price is an issue, and we should be open to other options.
At the very least, I believe that implementing a trial bus rapid transit shouldn't be too difficult or costly. And we can run it while the metro line project gets figured out.
King Connolly wanted nothing of it and verbally attacked at least one supervisor according to the Washington Post account
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
The outright arrogance of politicians in this area never ceases to amaze me
Let's hope that Foust and Herrity can overcome Connolly's abuse and keep asking the tough questions.
Even the Tysons landowners & Chamber of Commerce have come to realize that, with rail, they also need a dedicated bus right of way throughout Tysons because MOST of the 1700 acres will not be serviced by rail.
Sounds like rail is the "Emperor with no clothes". Connolly's voice is even more shrill in trying to convince us otherwise.