By Alec MacGillis
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 5, 2006; Article Link
Fairfax County officials are considering approving a major expansion of the Tysons Corner Center mall even as the county is in the middle of a much-touted effort to draft a new master plan for future development of the area.
This month, a consulting firm on a $1 million taxpayer-funded contract will start working with a county task force to draw up a plan for Tysons's future. Meanwhile, though, county officials are on the verge of approving the mall expansion, which would reshape the heart of Tysons with a ring of towers including a hotel, offices and more than 1,000 apartments.
The mall designs have generally been well received. But some residents question why the county is considering the proposal now, with officials still in the middle of the effort to rethink Tysons. Why spend so much time and money on planning, they ask, if the future of such pivotal parcels as Tysons Corner Center is already settled?
"They're wasting their time and our money, is the bottom line," said John Foust, a member of the McLean Citizens Association who testified last month in favor of deferring the mall proposal until after the new master plan is done.
Underlying the debate is the question of how to proceed with the overhaul of Tysons, which Fairfax leaders want to transform from an outsized, traffic-clogged office park into a vibrant, walkable downtown, aided by the expected arrival of Metrorail in 2012.
To guide this transformation, the Board of Supervisors appointed a 35-member task force last year to produce a new "comprehensive plan" for Tysons. Due next year, it is expected to include calls for an urban-style street grid and more high-rise construction around the four proposed Metro stations.
The task force is meeting regularly and getting considerable outside help: The county has set aside more than $600,000 for two consulting firms to collect public comments and create traffic models, and it awarded a $1 million contract last month for urban design consulting to PB Placemaking, a unit of construction giant Parsons Brinckerhoff.
But the transformation of Tysons is well underway, particularly in the center of the area, around the site of the proposed Metro station on Route 123 between Tysons Corner Center and the Tysons Galleria mall. In 2003, the county approved a proposal from Lerner Enterprises for eight high-rise office towers at Tysons II, even though the plans go against the county's preference for more residential space at Tysons.
Now comes Macerich Co., the California-based owner of Tysons Corner Center, with its plans to expand the 38-year-old mall by wrapping it with buildings as tall as 30 stories. The plans call for adding 3.5 million square feet to the 78-acre property over the next decade, a 150 percent increase. But rather than wait for the new master plan and whatever increase in density it will allow, Macerich is submitting its proposal under the existing 1994 plan, which it says allows for the expansion it is seeking.
Some residents argue that the proposal should not be approved under the existing plan because the project doesn't include the road upgrades required by the current master plan for a major increase in density. Macerich is offering to widen Routes 123 and 7 and expand the Westpark Drive bridge over Route 123, but critics say it should also build two grade-separated interchanges on International Drive or should have to wait for the new master plan.
"What happens at Tysons now is really historic stuff, and rather than doing one chunk in one way and another in another way, we argue that it be part of a broader comprehensive vision," said Will Elliott, a spokesman for the Vienna-based activist group FairGrowth.
Macerich officials say that the company's road offers are more than adequate and note that they applied months before the task force was formed. "We are clearly outside the purview" of the task force, said the company's attorney, Antonio Calabrese. "There's some serious posturing going on here."
In addition, he said, the mall proposal is in tune with the Tysons vision being discussed by the task force. The proposal includes a greater share of residential space than the Lerner one has, with 1,350 apartments, and a higher proportion of affordable units; it encourages mass transit use by limiting parking and keeping the mall open after stores close so commuters can walk through it to and from the station; and it features such public spaces as a large plaza with an ice rink.
The proposal, which was strongly endorsed by the county staff, is scheduled to be voted on by the Planning Commission next month, after which it will go before supervisors. If it is approved, future development on nearly 200 acres in the middle of the 1,700-acre Tysons area will be settled in advance of the new master plan.
Supervisor Linda Q. Smyth (D-Providence), who represents Tysons, acknowledged that the timing was not ideal but said it is possible that the new consultants could be granted a quick review of the mall's plans or that Macerich could be asked to leave open the chance of later revisions to reflect the findings of the task force.
Board of Supervisors Chairman Gerald E. Connolly (D) rejected the notion that the proposal diminished the task force's relevance, saying there is still plenty to work on, including development at the other three Metro stations, a street grid and improving pedestrian connections.
Amy Tozzi, a task force member from McLean, isn't so sure. It would be better, she said, if Macerich held off so there could be coordination among county officials and landowners about who would pay for which infrastructure upgrades called for by the task force.
"For developers to be trying to rush in and get under the wire is not in keeping" with the planning effort, she said. "We certainly would rather have the whole package."
Monday, November 13, 2006
061026 Team Chosen to Aid Tysons Task Force
Thursday, October 26, 2006; Article Link
Fairfax County officials have selected a team of consultants led by PB PlaceMaking to assist the Tysons Land Use Task Force in coordinating community participation and recommending changes to the master plan to include four planned Metro stations.
In a news release, county officials said the PB PlaceMaking team will provide "a strong local presence and a deep familiarity with transit-oriented development in the Washington region and an understanding of Tysons Corner."
The team also includes University of California professor Robert Cervero, McLarland Vasquez Emsiek & Partners, Bay Area Economics and Placeways LLC. This group of national and international experts brings extensive experience in integrating transportation and land use, the news release said.
PB PlaceMaking is a subsidiary of Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas Inc.
Task force members and county staff members selected the urban design team from among 10 proposals. The contract is valued at $894,000 plus optional tasks not to exceed $106,000. PB PlaceMaking will begin its support of the task force next month, according to the news release.
The selection is the next step in the process of updating the Tysons Corner portion of the county's master plan, which is the county's guidebook for land use and development, according to the news release.
The task force's planning principles, meeting schedules, presentations and other resources can be found at http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpz/tysonscorner . To sign up for e-mail or printed mail updates, visit the Web site, call 703-324-1344 TTY 711 or e-mail tysonscornerspecialstudy@fairfaxcounty.gov .
STEPHEN C. FEHR
Fairfax County officials have selected a team of consultants led by PB PlaceMaking to assist the Tysons Land Use Task Force in coordinating community participation and recommending changes to the master plan to include four planned Metro stations.
In a news release, county officials said the PB PlaceMaking team will provide "a strong local presence and a deep familiarity with transit-oriented development in the Washington region and an understanding of Tysons Corner."
The team also includes University of California professor Robert Cervero, McLarland Vasquez Emsiek & Partners, Bay Area Economics and Placeways LLC. This group of national and international experts brings extensive experience in integrating transportation and land use, the news release said.
PB PlaceMaking is a subsidiary of Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas Inc.
Task force members and county staff members selected the urban design team from among 10 proposals. The contract is valued at $894,000 plus optional tasks not to exceed $106,000. PB PlaceMaking will begin its support of the task force next month, according to the news release.
The selection is the next step in the process of updating the Tysons Corner portion of the county's master plan, which is the county's guidebook for land use and development, according to the news release.
The task force's planning principles, meeting schedules, presentations and other resources can be found at http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpz/tysonscorner . To sign up for e-mail or printed mail updates, visit the Web site, call 703-324-1344 TTY 711 or e-mail tysonscornerspecialstudy@fairfaxcounty.gov .
STEPHEN C. FEHR
060928 Tysons Corner Center
Tysons Corner Center sits on 82 acres, and the proposal to expand it offers some interesting numbers.
Thursday, September 28, 2006; Article Link
Now
2.2 million square feet of leasable area.
5 anchor stores.
300 stores and restaurants.
Proposal Would Add
3.5 million square feet of office, residential and retail space.
4 office buildings.
1,350 apartments and condos.
100 affordable housing units.
300 rooms in a new hotel.
200,000 square feet of retail.
19.4 acres of public space, including parks, plazas and courtyards.
Source: Macerich Co.
Thursday, September 28, 2006; Article Link
Now
2.2 million square feet of leasable area.
5 anchor stores.
300 stores and restaurants.
Proposal Would Add
3.5 million square feet of office, residential and retail space.
4 office buildings.
1,350 apartments and condos.
100 affordable housing units.
300 rooms in a new hotel.
200,000 square feet of retail.
19.4 acres of public space, including parks, plazas and courtyards.
Source: Macerich Co.
060927 Letter to the editor: Tysons at a Crossroads
Wednesday, September 27, 2006; Article Link
The Sept. 18 editorial "Start Building," on Tysons Corner and Metrorail, was wrong. Before condemning this regional hub to an irreversible, 50-year mistake, Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) should pause and find a better answer.
The decision to build overhead rail in Tysons has shaken citizens, elected officials and landowners alike. And for good reason: Try to imagine Arlington County with an elevated eyesore, as high as 45 feet, down the middle of Wilson Boulevard.
There are reasonable alternatives -- among them routing heavy rail around Tysons and using other ground-level methods to shuttle commuters into the business area.
Fairfax Supervisor T. Dana Kauffman (D-Lee) is right: A Tysons el train "will prove to be the wrong decision for the wrong reasons." Let's have one more round of discussion and get this right.
CHARLIE HALL, Fairfax
The writer is chairman of the Providence District Council.
***************************************************************
Wednesday, October 11, 2006; Article Link
The finger-pointing over the decision not to build a Metrorail tunnel through Tysons Corner seems misdirected.
How can Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) be blamed when he was informed by Republican Reps. Thomas M. Davis III and Frank R. Wolf -- masters of bringing pork to their districts -- that building the tunnel could cause the loss of federal funding, dooming the entire project?
How is it that Mr. Davis -- who as chairman of the House Government Reform Committee has asserted jurisdiction over such things as steroids in baseball -- can't prevail upon the Federal Transit Administration to allow the use of local money, with no increase in federal funding, to add a community improvement component to a project that has already been found worthy?
IRA BIRNBAUM, Annandale
As a temporary resident of the region, I have found Metro to be a marvelous transit system. I am, however, distressed at what appears to be a shortsighted decision on the proposed Metrorail extension through Tysons Corner.
At home in Camden County, N.J., an existing on-grade rail line was replaced many years ago with good light rail connecting to Philadelphia. After much wrangling, the decision was made to elevate most of the line. My home town, Haddonfield, managed to gather enough political clout to demand that the line be placed below grade, but many communities were bisected by an unattractive wall that divided many streets.
The planners of the Tysons project have a choice -- do the job right or settle for a schlock job that will blight the community for a long, long time.
JOHN T. HEIZER, Woodbridge
The Sept. 18 editorial "Start Building," on Tysons Corner and Metrorail, was wrong. Before condemning this regional hub to an irreversible, 50-year mistake, Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) should pause and find a better answer.
The decision to build overhead rail in Tysons has shaken citizens, elected officials and landowners alike. And for good reason: Try to imagine Arlington County with an elevated eyesore, as high as 45 feet, down the middle of Wilson Boulevard.
There are reasonable alternatives -- among them routing heavy rail around Tysons and using other ground-level methods to shuttle commuters into the business area.
Fairfax Supervisor T. Dana Kauffman (D-Lee) is right: A Tysons el train "will prove to be the wrong decision for the wrong reasons." Let's have one more round of discussion and get this right.
CHARLIE HALL, Fairfax
The writer is chairman of the Providence District Council.
***************************************************************
Wednesday, October 11, 2006; Article Link
The finger-pointing over the decision not to build a Metrorail tunnel through Tysons Corner seems misdirected.
How can Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) be blamed when he was informed by Republican Reps. Thomas M. Davis III and Frank R. Wolf -- masters of bringing pork to their districts -- that building the tunnel could cause the loss of federal funding, dooming the entire project?
How is it that Mr. Davis -- who as chairman of the House Government Reform Committee has asserted jurisdiction over such things as steroids in baseball -- can't prevail upon the Federal Transit Administration to allow the use of local money, with no increase in federal funding, to add a community improvement component to a project that has already been found worthy?
IRA BIRNBAUM, Annandale
As a temporary resident of the region, I have found Metro to be a marvelous transit system. I am, however, distressed at what appears to be a shortsighted decision on the proposed Metrorail extension through Tysons Corner.
At home in Camden County, N.J., an existing on-grade rail line was replaced many years ago with good light rail connecting to Philadelphia. After much wrangling, the decision was made to elevate most of the line. My home town, Haddonfield, managed to gather enough political clout to demand that the line be placed below grade, but many communities were bisected by an unattractive wall that divided many streets.
The planners of the Tysons project have a choice -- do the job right or settle for a schlock job that will blight the community for a long, long time.
JOHN T. HEIZER, Woodbridge
September 7, 2006 Vriginia No Tunnel For Tysons, Kaine Says
Federal Concerns About Cost Prove Insurmountable
By Alec MacGillis
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 7, 2006; Article Link
Gov. Timothy M. Kaine announced yesterday that a proposal to build a tunnel under Tysons Corner as part of a Metrorail expansion to Dulles International Airport is dead, after federal officials and area congressmen made clear that the costs of an underground link could jeopardize the entire 23-mile, $4 billion project.
Kaine's decision in favor of an elevated track through Tysons represents a stunning shift, coming just a week after contractors, local officials and others involved in the project expected an announcement in favor of a below-ground route.
The decision means that construction on the Metro extension from West Falls Church to Dulles will begin late next year on a schedule to reach Reston by 2012, a year later than planned, partly because of the months spent studying the tunnel option. The line is planned to reach the airport and Loudoun County by 2015.
"We carefully reviewed the tunnel option at Tysons, and I share the belief of many of our project partners that a tunnel alignment would be the best option," Kaine (D) said in a statement after a meeting on Capitol Hill yesterday morning. "However, too many unanswered questions remain about cost and timing. These uncertainties cannot be allowed to jeopardize this critical project."
The decision comes after nearly a year of growing momentum for using an advanced tunneling technology to put the four-mile Tysons stretch underground, rather than on an elevated track running down Chain Bridge Road and Leesburg Pike. The announcement dismayed some Fairfax County leaders, Tysons landowners, Metro officials and other tunnel supporters, who say an elevated track cutting through the area will make it much more difficult to create a walkable downtown.
"This will prove to be the wrong decision for the wrong reasons," said Fairfax Supervisor T. Dana Kauffman (D-Lee), who is also on the Metro board. "Ten years from now, I regret my son may pick up a planning text where Fairfax's long-awaited rail extension is highlighted as a failed attempt at service and economic development. It can't only be about the here and now."
A week ago, all signs were pointing toward a decision in favor of a tunnel. A panel of engineers convened by the governor this summer endorsed the tunnel option, saying that although it would be more costly, it would cause far less disruption during construction, in addition to the long-term benefits. Within the past two weeks, the governor's office prepared a news release announcing a decision in favor of a tunnel, with indications that the announcement probably would be made before Labor Day, several sources said.
But word of a pro-tunnel decision prompted even stronger cautions from influential skeptics, including officials in the Federal Transit Administration, which must approve the project, and Reps. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) and Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.), the extension's top sponsors on Capitol Hill. When Kaine and his staff made their final checks with federal officials, they were met with blunt warnings about the extra costs and delays of a tunnel, say those familiar with the meetings.
Wolf and Davis had cautioned Kaine in a July letter that the tunnel could jeopardize the entire rail line. In recent days, they increasingly made it known that Kaine should not count on them to secure federal support for an underground route.
"It was clear that if you gambled and went for gold, that chances for success were very small," Davis said yesterday. "In the start, it was, 'How do we make this thing work,' but in the end it was clear it was not only a risk but a likelihood that we would lose federal approval."
Davis and others were worried about losing the $900 million the federal government is expected to provide for the extension. The delays required for reviewing and designing a tunnel, they said, would push the project into future funding cycles and potentially put the money at risk.
The extra expense could also put the project at risk of failing to meet the FTA's "cost effectiveness" standards, federal officials said. Even if tunnel supporters managed to find local sources to cover its cost, there was a chance that the FTA would deem the project too expensive and withdraw the $900 million.
Kaine and others in his administration expressed confidence in recent months that they could find a way to obtain approval for a rail line within those standards. Supporters noted that the panel convened by Kaine had determined that a tunnel would cause only a year's delay and would cost at most $200 million more than an elevated track.
But in recent days, FTA officials and the congressmen drove home just how difficult meeting the standards could be. Davis pointed to one specific new threat: that switching plans could, for technical reasons, effectively annul legislation giving the Dulles line an exemption from new, even stricter standards for transit projects.
Davis said yesterday that the FTA also "did not buy" the engineer panel's cost estimate, noting that it was based on a brief proposal from companies seeking to build a tunnel and not on detailed plans. Federal officials argued that the delay caused by switching plans alone would drive the cost of a tunnel higher because of increased construction costs.
Kaine's aides said yesterday that the governor had been hearing the federal warnings via his staff for some time but did not hear them directly until early last week, when he began a series of one-on-one phone calls and meetings on Capitol Hill.
"The message was, 'We will support you, but be aware that we have done significant heavy lifting to secure these funds and hold on to them. There is a very real downside risk,' " Kaine spokesman Kevin Hall said.
Aides said Kaine was stunned that federal officials would sacrifice the tunnel even if any extra cost were borne by state or private sources. He and lawmakers met with FTA Administrator James Simpson yesterday morning. Simpson was blunt, saying that if they pushed for a tunnel, they were likely to lose any commitment for federal money, according to Hall, who was at the meeting.
Virginia's senior senator, John W. Warner (R), implored Simpson, according to two people at the meeting. But Wolf, who has fought to gain rail money for years, argued against risking the federal funds, at one point banging his fist on the table to make his point.
Kaine and the lawmakers huddled briefly outside the office, where they agreed to issue a joint statement abandoning the tunnel.
Wolf praised the governor afterward. "I commend the governor for his decision. It was a tough decision, a Solomonic decision," he said. "You wouldn't want to roll the dice."
Some tunnel supporters yesterday pointed fingers at the contractors on the project, a consortium of Bechtel and Washington Group International that was threatened with losing at least the Tysons part of the job to companies proposing to build the tunnel. Tunnel supporters said Bechtel has used its considerable clout to block a tunnel. A company spokesman denied the contention.
The track through Tysons will run 35 feet high, on average, and dip briefly below ground at the juncture of Leesburg Pike and Chain Bridge Road. Tunnel supporters, including the largest landowner at Tysons, WestGroup, say an elevated track will make it harder to add a new street grid and build close to the street, both hallmarks of successful urban areas.
"There are just as many risks that the elevated is not going to succeed, because it will inhibit good urban design and ridership," said Stewart Schwartz, director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. "We're talking about a 100-year decision. As a region, we should be a lot bolder than this."
Board of Supervisors Chairman Gerald E. Connolly (D), another tunnel backer, struck a more resigned note.
"We will make [an elevated track] work because we have to," he said. The governor "had a tough decision to make, given the position of the two congressmen and the FTA. We don't live in an ideal world, and we'll make it work."
Staff writer Michael D. Shear contributed to this report.
By Alec MacGillis
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 7, 2006; Article Link
Gov. Timothy M. Kaine announced yesterday that a proposal to build a tunnel under Tysons Corner as part of a Metrorail expansion to Dulles International Airport is dead, after federal officials and area congressmen made clear that the costs of an underground link could jeopardize the entire 23-mile, $4 billion project.
Kaine's decision in favor of an elevated track through Tysons represents a stunning shift, coming just a week after contractors, local officials and others involved in the project expected an announcement in favor of a below-ground route.
The decision means that construction on the Metro extension from West Falls Church to Dulles will begin late next year on a schedule to reach Reston by 2012, a year later than planned, partly because of the months spent studying the tunnel option. The line is planned to reach the airport and Loudoun County by 2015.
"We carefully reviewed the tunnel option at Tysons, and I share the belief of many of our project partners that a tunnel alignment would be the best option," Kaine (D) said in a statement after a meeting on Capitol Hill yesterday morning. "However, too many unanswered questions remain about cost and timing. These uncertainties cannot be allowed to jeopardize this critical project."
The decision comes after nearly a year of growing momentum for using an advanced tunneling technology to put the four-mile Tysons stretch underground, rather than on an elevated track running down Chain Bridge Road and Leesburg Pike. The announcement dismayed some Fairfax County leaders, Tysons landowners, Metro officials and other tunnel supporters, who say an elevated track cutting through the area will make it much more difficult to create a walkable downtown.
"This will prove to be the wrong decision for the wrong reasons," said Fairfax Supervisor T. Dana Kauffman (D-Lee), who is also on the Metro board. "Ten years from now, I regret my son may pick up a planning text where Fairfax's long-awaited rail extension is highlighted as a failed attempt at service and economic development. It can't only be about the here and now."
A week ago, all signs were pointing toward a decision in favor of a tunnel. A panel of engineers convened by the governor this summer endorsed the tunnel option, saying that although it would be more costly, it would cause far less disruption during construction, in addition to the long-term benefits. Within the past two weeks, the governor's office prepared a news release announcing a decision in favor of a tunnel, with indications that the announcement probably would be made before Labor Day, several sources said.
But word of a pro-tunnel decision prompted even stronger cautions from influential skeptics, including officials in the Federal Transit Administration, which must approve the project, and Reps. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) and Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.), the extension's top sponsors on Capitol Hill. When Kaine and his staff made their final checks with federal officials, they were met with blunt warnings about the extra costs and delays of a tunnel, say those familiar with the meetings.
Wolf and Davis had cautioned Kaine in a July letter that the tunnel could jeopardize the entire rail line. In recent days, they increasingly made it known that Kaine should not count on them to secure federal support for an underground route.
"It was clear that if you gambled and went for gold, that chances for success were very small," Davis said yesterday. "In the start, it was, 'How do we make this thing work,' but in the end it was clear it was not only a risk but a likelihood that we would lose federal approval."
Davis and others were worried about losing the $900 million the federal government is expected to provide for the extension. The delays required for reviewing and designing a tunnel, they said, would push the project into future funding cycles and potentially put the money at risk.
The extra expense could also put the project at risk of failing to meet the FTA's "cost effectiveness" standards, federal officials said. Even if tunnel supporters managed to find local sources to cover its cost, there was a chance that the FTA would deem the project too expensive and withdraw the $900 million.
Kaine and others in his administration expressed confidence in recent months that they could find a way to obtain approval for a rail line within those standards. Supporters noted that the panel convened by Kaine had determined that a tunnel would cause only a year's delay and would cost at most $200 million more than an elevated track.
But in recent days, FTA officials and the congressmen drove home just how difficult meeting the standards could be. Davis pointed to one specific new threat: that switching plans could, for technical reasons, effectively annul legislation giving the Dulles line an exemption from new, even stricter standards for transit projects.
Davis said yesterday that the FTA also "did not buy" the engineer panel's cost estimate, noting that it was based on a brief proposal from companies seeking to build a tunnel and not on detailed plans. Federal officials argued that the delay caused by switching plans alone would drive the cost of a tunnel higher because of increased construction costs.
Kaine's aides said yesterday that the governor had been hearing the federal warnings via his staff for some time but did not hear them directly until early last week, when he began a series of one-on-one phone calls and meetings on Capitol Hill.
"The message was, 'We will support you, but be aware that we have done significant heavy lifting to secure these funds and hold on to them. There is a very real downside risk,' " Kaine spokesman Kevin Hall said.
Aides said Kaine was stunned that federal officials would sacrifice the tunnel even if any extra cost were borne by state or private sources. He and lawmakers met with FTA Administrator James Simpson yesterday morning. Simpson was blunt, saying that if they pushed for a tunnel, they were likely to lose any commitment for federal money, according to Hall, who was at the meeting.
Virginia's senior senator, John W. Warner (R), implored Simpson, according to two people at the meeting. But Wolf, who has fought to gain rail money for years, argued against risking the federal funds, at one point banging his fist on the table to make his point.
Kaine and the lawmakers huddled briefly outside the office, where they agreed to issue a joint statement abandoning the tunnel.
Wolf praised the governor afterward. "I commend the governor for his decision. It was a tough decision, a Solomonic decision," he said. "You wouldn't want to roll the dice."
Some tunnel supporters yesterday pointed fingers at the contractors on the project, a consortium of Bechtel and Washington Group International that was threatened with losing at least the Tysons part of the job to companies proposing to build the tunnel. Tunnel supporters said Bechtel has used its considerable clout to block a tunnel. A company spokesman denied the contention.
The track through Tysons will run 35 feet high, on average, and dip briefly below ground at the juncture of Leesburg Pike and Chain Bridge Road. Tunnel supporters, including the largest landowner at Tysons, WestGroup, say an elevated track will make it harder to add a new street grid and build close to the street, both hallmarks of successful urban areas.
"There are just as many risks that the elevated is not going to succeed, because it will inhibit good urban design and ridership," said Stewart Schwartz, director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. "We're talking about a 100-year decision. As a region, we should be a lot bolder than this."
Board of Supervisors Chairman Gerald E. Connolly (D), another tunnel backer, struck a more resigned note.
"We will make [an elevated track] work because we have to," he said. The governor "had a tough decision to make, given the position of the two congressmen and the FTA. We don't live in an ideal world, and we'll make it work."
Staff writer Michael D. Shear contributed to this report.
Novermber 13, 2006 Virginia Plan to extend Metro to Dulles airport delayed
by Bryan Han
Hatchet Reporter
Issue date: 11/13/06 Section: Article Link
Deliberations over using a tunnel or an above-ground rail delayed construction on Metro's extension to Dulles International Airport another year.
The planned 23-mile extension runs through Tysons Corner, Reston, Herndon, Dulles airport and east Loudoun County in Northern Virginia. Construction is expected to break ground anywhere from fall 2007 to early 2008, pending a $9 million "full funding grant agreement" from the state, said Marcia McAllister, communications manager of the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project.
The plan will occur in two phases: the first extension will go from the East Falls Church station to Wiehle Avenue in Reston, Va., and the second will run to Dulles Airport.
"We anticipate opening the first phase to service in 2012, and the second phase will be open before 2015," McAllister said.
McAllister said the project was delayed a year because of renewed interest to run the rail through a tunnel instead of on aerial tracks. Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, a Democrat, had an independent panel from the American Association of Civil Engineers survey the tunnel plan.
The tunnel would have cost anywhere from $200 million to $600 million more than the aerial track plan, which has a total cost of approximately $4.2 billion. Kaine rejected the tunnel plan in September over cost concerns, and the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation resumed work on the extension.
Construction cannot start until Virginia's transportation department gives control of the project to the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, the agency in charge of Dulles and Ronald Reagan National Airport airport. The switch, requested by MWAA in May, is expected in early spring 2007, McAllister said.
Senior Morgan Corr, who introduced the Colonial Coach program last year as the SA's executive vice president, said getting to Dulles is not an easy undertaking. Corr worked with former SA Senator and alumnus Ben Traverse to develop the project in spring 2005 as a result of their own difficulties getting to the airport.
"The Metro extension to the airport is a necessary addition to the Metro services," Corr wrote in an e-mail. "This demonstrates just how great a need there is for better transportation to Dulles International Airport, and it will relieve some of the burden currently placed on travelers."
Corr said he thinks the Colonial Coach will continue to be a popular program even when the Metro extension is finished.
"I'm certain that the Student Association will re-evaluate the Colonial Coach program once the Metro extension has been fully completed and implemented," he said. "Even once that is done, I am certain that there will still be student demand for alternative routes to Dulles."
Several students said the extension to Dulles would be helpful to GW students.
"(The extension) would have helped me a lot. It's probably about $50 cheaper than a taxi and $15 cheaper than a shuttle," graduate student David Johnson said.
Senior Gordon Yu said the extension was a good idea, especially since travelers taking long or tiring flights may not be alert enough to drive safely. He said he got into his first car accident following a flight back from China because he did not get much sleep on the plane.
"Last time I was back from China, people coming off the plane were really tired and worn from travel," he said.
Yu said increased access to stores in Tysons Corner, part of a major shopping mall, would not make much of a difference to GW students.
"I think GW students already have good access to Pentagon City by Metro," Yu said of the mall four stops down on the Blue Line. "I'm not sure if Tysons Corner would be a big deal."
Students can commute to Dulles Airport by taking a car or taxi or by taking the Metro to West Falls Church and then transferring to the Washington Flyer shuttle. Also, the Student Association will run two buses - one to Dulles and one to Baltimore-Washington International Airport - before Thanksgiving, winter and spring breaks.
Colonial Coach, will run two days before Thanksgiving break, three before winter break and two before spring break, said sophomore Kara Eusebio, deputy chief of staff to SA President Lamar Thorpe. The free shuttle bus leaves the Marvin Center at 9 a.m., noon, 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. on service days. A spot must be reserved in advance.
Hatchet Reporter
Issue date: 11/13/06 Section: Article Link
Deliberations over using a tunnel or an above-ground rail delayed construction on Metro's extension to Dulles International Airport another year.
The planned 23-mile extension runs through Tysons Corner, Reston, Herndon, Dulles airport and east Loudoun County in Northern Virginia. Construction is expected to break ground anywhere from fall 2007 to early 2008, pending a $9 million "full funding grant agreement" from the state, said Marcia McAllister, communications manager of the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project.
The plan will occur in two phases: the first extension will go from the East Falls Church station to Wiehle Avenue in Reston, Va., and the second will run to Dulles Airport.
"We anticipate opening the first phase to service in 2012, and the second phase will be open before 2015," McAllister said.
McAllister said the project was delayed a year because of renewed interest to run the rail through a tunnel instead of on aerial tracks. Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, a Democrat, had an independent panel from the American Association of Civil Engineers survey the tunnel plan.
The tunnel would have cost anywhere from $200 million to $600 million more than the aerial track plan, which has a total cost of approximately $4.2 billion. Kaine rejected the tunnel plan in September over cost concerns, and the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation resumed work on the extension.
Construction cannot start until Virginia's transportation department gives control of the project to the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, the agency in charge of Dulles and Ronald Reagan National Airport airport. The switch, requested by MWAA in May, is expected in early spring 2007, McAllister said.
Senior Morgan Corr, who introduced the Colonial Coach program last year as the SA's executive vice president, said getting to Dulles is not an easy undertaking. Corr worked with former SA Senator and alumnus Ben Traverse to develop the project in spring 2005 as a result of their own difficulties getting to the airport.
"The Metro extension to the airport is a necessary addition to the Metro services," Corr wrote in an e-mail. "This demonstrates just how great a need there is for better transportation to Dulles International Airport, and it will relieve some of the burden currently placed on travelers."
Corr said he thinks the Colonial Coach will continue to be a popular program even when the Metro extension is finished.
"I'm certain that the Student Association will re-evaluate the Colonial Coach program once the Metro extension has been fully completed and implemented," he said. "Even once that is done, I am certain that there will still be student demand for alternative routes to Dulles."
Several students said the extension to Dulles would be helpful to GW students.
"(The extension) would have helped me a lot. It's probably about $50 cheaper than a taxi and $15 cheaper than a shuttle," graduate student David Johnson said.
Senior Gordon Yu said the extension was a good idea, especially since travelers taking long or tiring flights may not be alert enough to drive safely. He said he got into his first car accident following a flight back from China because he did not get much sleep on the plane.
"Last time I was back from China, people coming off the plane were really tired and worn from travel," he said.
Yu said increased access to stores in Tysons Corner, part of a major shopping mall, would not make much of a difference to GW students.
"I think GW students already have good access to Pentagon City by Metro," Yu said of the mall four stops down on the Blue Line. "I'm not sure if Tysons Corner would be a big deal."
Students can commute to Dulles Airport by taking a car or taxi or by taking the Metro to West Falls Church and then transferring to the Washington Flyer shuttle. Also, the Student Association will run two buses - one to Dulles and one to Baltimore-Washington International Airport - before Thanksgiving, winter and spring breaks.
Colonial Coach, will run two days before Thanksgiving break, three before winter break and two before spring break, said sophomore Kara Eusebio, deputy chief of staff to SA President Lamar Thorpe. The free shuttle bus leaves the Marvin Center at 9 a.m., noon, 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. on service days. A spot must be reserved in advance.
Sunday, November 05, 2006
Novermber 5, 2006 New York view bike lanes as part of transportation
Op-Ed Contributor
Rolling Thunder - The New York Times
By SAMUEL I. SCHWARTZ
Published: November 5, 2006
EVEN my own daughter, Deena, complains to me: “Dad, I know you’re a big fan of bikes but you’ve got to do something about them. I almost got run over by a woman on Second Avenue!”
About 300 people are killed each year in traffic accidents in New York City, about half of them pedestrians hit by cars. On average, one pedestrian dies each year after being struck by a bike. But if one were to measure the complaints I get, one would imagine the statistics were reversed.
What is it about the conflict between bike riders and pedestrians that’s got so many people riled up and what can be done about it? It’s important to look at this historically.
The complaint meter first began to rise after the 11-day transit strike in April 1980. The bicycle messenger industry, which started in earnest in the 1970s, had hit its stride by 1980 (before the widespread use of e-mail or even faxes). During the strike, New Yorkers discovered bikes as a great way to commute. Then there was an awful six-week period starting in June when three women died after being struck by bikes.
I was the Department of Transportation’s assistant commissioner under Mayor Ed Koch, who, buoyed by a visit to Beijing, where he saw bike lanes used by tens of thousands, envisioned a network of physically separated bikeways up and down Manhattan.
In the summer of 1980, the mayor directed the department to install bikeways. From Washington Square Park to Central Park, the curb lanes of Fifth Avenue, Broadway and Seventh Avenue were separated from traffic by asphalt islands, giving bikers a lane of car-free roadway all their own.
Within days the complaints started to pour in. Most of the grumbling was from pedestrians concerned about reckless cyclists coming close to knocking them down (the three deaths were fresh in their minds). Some were from drivers who felt there was more congestion because of the loss of a lane.
The department’s investigation found that pedestrians considered the bike lanes to be extensions of the sidewalk; they stood in the lanes waiting for the lights to change, where bikers often yelled at them. (The conflict between bicyclists and pedestrians is much more visceral than any between car drivers and pedestrians. You can see a biker’s face and hear his words.)
Mr. Koch made his own observations and found many bike riders traveling outside the lanes. He had us install traffic signs along the bike lanes in typical Koch-ese — “Use it or Lose it.” But even though the lanes were largely successful — and car traffic didn’t slow nearly as much as people thought — criticism mounted.
During a limousine ride up Avenue of the Americas with Mr. Koch and President Jimmy Carter, Gov. Hugh Carey pointed out the bike lanes to Mr. Carter and joked, “See how Ed is wasting your money.” Within weeks, the mayor directed us to remove the barriers separating the lanes, which afterward were designated only by painted lines.
I think we made a mistake. We succumbed to the emotions of the moment. Had we kept the bigger picture in mind, we could have produced a network of separate bike lanes, a widespread public education program and tough enforcement that would have combined to promote good transportation policy and safety.
Now what do we do in 2006?
First, we need to establish a clear hierarchy for the use of city streets. Pedestrians come first; we started out as a walking city and it will be our greatest strength going forward. This means bikers must yield to pedestrians — even errant ones. Biking is a superb form of transport we should encourage. Drivers must yield to bike riders — even errant ones.
Second, we must enforce the rules. Police officers should write summonses specifically for “failure to yield” by bike riders (and car drivers). When you ask the Police Department to write summonses generally, they’ll do just that — produce lots of summonses, including many for minor infractions like not having a reflector. In fact, the Police Department has so far written 40,000 summonses to bike riders in 2006; no one I’ve spoken to has noticed better behavior. Instead, let’s focus on what really matters — making sure bicyclists respect the right of way of pedestrians — and crack down on bike riders who don’t.
Third, let’s advance the network of bike lanes citywide. I’d even re-introduce physically separate bike lanes. This program needs to be communicated in a mass campaign explaining rules of the road and each group’s responsibility. For example, drivers need to know they are forbidden to enter a bike lane to turn; bikers need to know that they must not block crosswalks; pedestrians must learn they can’t use bike lanes as sidewalks.
Finally, we need to recognize that our economic and physical well-being are advanced when more people are able to enjoy our streets. Car traffic must be reduced and more room made for pedestrians and bike lanes. London and Stockholm understand this — that’s why they introduced congestion pricing and sharply reduced car traffic.
Our time has come.
Samuel I. Schwartz is the president of a transportation consulting company and a transportation columnist for The Daily News.
Rolling Thunder - The New York Times
By SAMUEL I. SCHWARTZ
Published: November 5, 2006
EVEN my own daughter, Deena, complains to me: “Dad, I know you’re a big fan of bikes but you’ve got to do something about them. I almost got run over by a woman on Second Avenue!”
About 300 people are killed each year in traffic accidents in New York City, about half of them pedestrians hit by cars. On average, one pedestrian dies each year after being struck by a bike. But if one were to measure the complaints I get, one would imagine the statistics were reversed.
What is it about the conflict between bike riders and pedestrians that’s got so many people riled up and what can be done about it? It’s important to look at this historically.
The complaint meter first began to rise after the 11-day transit strike in April 1980. The bicycle messenger industry, which started in earnest in the 1970s, had hit its stride by 1980 (before the widespread use of e-mail or even faxes). During the strike, New Yorkers discovered bikes as a great way to commute. Then there was an awful six-week period starting in June when three women died after being struck by bikes.
I was the Department of Transportation’s assistant commissioner under Mayor Ed Koch, who, buoyed by a visit to Beijing, where he saw bike lanes used by tens of thousands, envisioned a network of physically separated bikeways up and down Manhattan.
In the summer of 1980, the mayor directed the department to install bikeways. From Washington Square Park to Central Park, the curb lanes of Fifth Avenue, Broadway and Seventh Avenue were separated from traffic by asphalt islands, giving bikers a lane of car-free roadway all their own.
Within days the complaints started to pour in. Most of the grumbling was from pedestrians concerned about reckless cyclists coming close to knocking them down (the three deaths were fresh in their minds). Some were from drivers who felt there was more congestion because of the loss of a lane.
The department’s investigation found that pedestrians considered the bike lanes to be extensions of the sidewalk; they stood in the lanes waiting for the lights to change, where bikers often yelled at them. (The conflict between bicyclists and pedestrians is much more visceral than any between car drivers and pedestrians. You can see a biker’s face and hear his words.)
Mr. Koch made his own observations and found many bike riders traveling outside the lanes. He had us install traffic signs along the bike lanes in typical Koch-ese — “Use it or Lose it.” But even though the lanes were largely successful — and car traffic didn’t slow nearly as much as people thought — criticism mounted.
During a limousine ride up Avenue of the Americas with Mr. Koch and President Jimmy Carter, Gov. Hugh Carey pointed out the bike lanes to Mr. Carter and joked, “See how Ed is wasting your money.” Within weeks, the mayor directed us to remove the barriers separating the lanes, which afterward were designated only by painted lines.
I think we made a mistake. We succumbed to the emotions of the moment. Had we kept the bigger picture in mind, we could have produced a network of separate bike lanes, a widespread public education program and tough enforcement that would have combined to promote good transportation policy and safety.
Now what do we do in 2006?
First, we need to establish a clear hierarchy for the use of city streets. Pedestrians come first; we started out as a walking city and it will be our greatest strength going forward. This means bikers must yield to pedestrians — even errant ones. Biking is a superb form of transport we should encourage. Drivers must yield to bike riders — even errant ones.
Second, we must enforce the rules. Police officers should write summonses specifically for “failure to yield” by bike riders (and car drivers). When you ask the Police Department to write summonses generally, they’ll do just that — produce lots of summonses, including many for minor infractions like not having a reflector. In fact, the Police Department has so far written 40,000 summonses to bike riders in 2006; no one I’ve spoken to has noticed better behavior. Instead, let’s focus on what really matters — making sure bicyclists respect the right of way of pedestrians — and crack down on bike riders who don’t.
Third, let’s advance the network of bike lanes citywide. I’d even re-introduce physically separate bike lanes. This program needs to be communicated in a mass campaign explaining rules of the road and each group’s responsibility. For example, drivers need to know they are forbidden to enter a bike lane to turn; bikers need to know that they must not block crosswalks; pedestrians must learn they can’t use bike lanes as sidewalks.
Finally, we need to recognize that our economic and physical well-being are advanced when more people are able to enjoy our streets. Car traffic must be reduced and more room made for pedestrians and bike lanes. London and Stockholm understand this — that’s why they introduced congestion pricing and sharply reduced car traffic.
Our time has come.
Samuel I. Schwartz is the president of a transportation consulting company and a transportation columnist for The Daily News.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
