Comments on: Dulles Rail Project Already Harming Virginia

By: I want less traffic

I want less traffic — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:15:37 +0000

Several billion dollars and five years of construction traffic? In the long run it will probably be worth it in gas savings alone. Most transportation departments put the true cost of driving at a dollar a mile and gas keeps going up. If ten thousand people end up using this line to save 10 miles of driving per day (each way) that would be $50 million a year in driving savings. Not to mention saving traffic fatalities and the environment. Each gallon of gasoline causes 19.6 pounds of CO2 emissions.

But there is another mass transit solution available right now for free. The VRE train goes to Union Station in the morning then comes back empty to Manassas and Frederickburg. Why not put office buildings at these VRE stations and take tens of thousands of car trips off rush hour by filling the train with people both ways? It will eliminate an estimated $300 million in VRE subsidies by doubling ridership. Each VRE line could be turned into a Ballston or Clarendon.

Although the Fredericksburg line is terribly jammed, the Manassas line (Norfolk Southern) is so underused that extra trains can run at short intervals all day long, creating 13 Metro stations.

Does a free solution make too much sense?

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:31:05 +0000

Blue,
The MWAA is a public body no? Anything is possible, only federal law and MWAA regulation keeps it open only to airport users. The MWAA itself was created via state and DC legislation. Change the law. It just seems insane to be proposing 5-10 billion dollar construction projects when there are 4 lanes just sitting there, underutilized relative to the rest of the areas roads. Instead of funding multi-million dollar studies of tunnel vs. raised, how bout a study of opening the lanes vs. spending biliions?

By: Turn PW Blue

Turn PW Blue — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:52:27 +0000

For the Dulles Rail project, the two exceptions used were urgency (Federal dollars are going to magically disappear if not allocated by a specific date) and scope (only Bechtel is qualified for a project of this scope). Both of these are specious arguments. I’m not saying there was outright corruption as much as laziness. It’s a whole lot easier to no-bid contracts than go through all the complexities of an open procurement.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:16:42 +0000

Blue,

Good information…and this is why it is a homework assignment.

Consider the following…

The Act provides for procurement procedures consistent with either “competitive sealed bidding” or “competitive negotiation.” The Department may not use procedures consistent with competitive negotiation unless the Department provides a written determination to the Secretary of Transportation that such procedures are advantageous to the Department and to the public based on (1) the probable scope, complexity, or urgency of a project; (2) risk sharing including guaranteed cost or completion guarantees, added value, or debt or equity investments proposed by the private entity; or (3) an increase in funding, dedicated revenue source or other economic benefit from the project that would not otherwise be available. Written approval of the procurement process is required by the Secretary of Transportation before the Department Administrator may sign an interim and/or a comprehensive agreement.

http://www.virginiadot.org/business/resources/PPTAGuidelines.pdf

Before we can throw out the ‘there was no competitive bidding’ argument, let’s establish that the method used violated the above. Are we insinuating in some way that the Secretary of Transportation is somehow complicit in corruption?

I’m not saying I totally understand the situation in it’s entirety, but the statement by Greg needs a little fleshing out and definitely isn’t as simple as ‘it should have and wasn’t,’ as proposed.

By: Turn PW Blue

Turn PW Blue — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:44:27 +0000

Dave:

The airport lanes aren’t a state highway. They are owned by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority.

By: Turn PW Blue

Turn PW Blue — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:43:36 +0000

Anonymous:

Take a look at PPTA, specifically 56-573.1

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+56-573.1

While there is indeed an exception that allows for non-competitive procurements, clearly the spirit of the law is that competitive processes be used.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:14:23 +0000

Open up the airport lanes to all traffic, this seems like a no brainer to me.

By: Riley

Riley — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:02:21 +0000

They should just scrap this whole thing and do the Rapid Bus Transit between the Pentagon and Dulles that is a fraction of the cost and can be implemented within a few months. If this money is really burning a hole in their pockets, build another bridge or two to cross the Potomac from Virginia to D.C. and then bury 14th Street in the District and have exits come off that as it heads north, similar to I-395 under the Capitol. That way traffic won’t be backed up all the way to Springfield on I-395 because of the traffic lights on 14th Street as soon as you cross the bridge into DC. Those are the only things that will remove the main source of gridlock in NOVA.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 10:13:38 +0000

I think it is time for a homework assignment. The project was bid under the Public Private Transportation Act (PPTA). While some may argue the value of the Act itself, it is a unique funding mechanism for public projects that doesn’t require the actual work to be bid out. Other projects such as the Rt 28 corridor have been built using the PPTA also, but I don’t hear anybody complaining that they were built without competitive bids.

Don’t get me wrong. I think above ground rail is a terrible idea and the DC Examiner article seems to be pointing out some of the unintended consequences.

It is though important to have an intellectually honest argument. There are many more ways to attack the prudence of this project than by claiming that there was no competitive bid.