|
The
Five-Legged Dog
Asserting
that Rail to Dulles is an effective solution to
Northern Virginia's transportation problems does
not make it so. The project is broken, and it's
time to re-think mobility solutions for the Dulles
corridor.
Abraham
Lincoln was fond of observing that calling a tail
a leg does not beget a five legged dog. We have a
five-legged dog right here in Northern Virginia,
and that dog don’t hunt.
Proponents
of the Tyson’s tunnel for Dulles Rail argued
that tunneling was far preferable to an elevated
alignment, which would blight the skyline. Now,
after Gov. Timothy M. Kaine correctly nixed the
tunnel, some are arguing that the “El” won’t
be so bad after all.
In
fact, the President of the Dulles Corridor Rail
Association (DCRA) claimed that the El will help
transform Route 7 “on the order of Pennsylvania
Avenue in the District of Columbia.” Really? Sounds
like the five-legged dog to me.
DCRA
should visit Pennsylvania Avenue. The first thing
they might notice is that “America’s Main
Street” does not have a concrete and steel
elevated train looming over it. Nor does it
have massive, concrete pillars every 75 feet or
so.
DCRA
might further notice that the “Avenue of the
Presidents” connects two of the most important
edifices in our nation – The Capitol and the
White House – and that it contains many other
buildings and sites of national interest, such as
the Old Post Office Building. Pennsylvania Avenue
was designated a national historic site in 1965
and was added to the National Register of Historic
Places in 1966.
Let’s
face it: Route 7 is not and will never be
Pennsylvania Avenue. Moreover, an elevated train
would destroy Pennsylvania Avenue just as surely
as it would destroy hopes of creating a better
Route 7. It’s just a bad idea.
Nevertheless,
some are howling for the El on the pretext that it
will ease congestion. Really? According to Table
6.2-2 of the Commonwealth’s own Final
Environmental Impact Statement, all of the major
roads in the Dulles Corridor will be level of
service “F” (gridlock) regardless of whether
the El is built or not.
In
other words, the El trashes the Tyson’s skyline
and takes $4 billion out of our pockets, yet fails
to make a dent in traffic on roads in the same
corridor. The five-legged dog is running amok!
But
surely, some argue, the El is better than no rail
at all, right? Wrong again.
Earlier
this year, the US Department of Transportation
issued a “National Strategy to Reduce Congestion
on America’s Transportation Network.” In it,
the Secretary of Transportation found that
“congestion is not a fact of life [, nor is it]
the insurmountable fate of the American people.”
In other words, there is a way out of congestion,
if we have the political will to follow the path.
The
Secretary even offered a detailed plan, which
includes more road tolling, express buses or bus
rapid transit (BRT), and telecommuting. Rail
transit is not recommended anywhere, or in any
form.
Hold
the phone! After the tunnel collapse, our elected
officials were gushing with superlatives, like
rail is “critical” or “imperative” to
addressing our congestion crisis. Yet, their own
study and now the United States Secretary of
Transportation both disagree. How can this be?
Answer:
the five-legged dog is on a rampage. No
matter what boosters call it, we need the El to
solve congestion about as much as a fish needs a
bicycle. Our children will regret the concrete
monstrosity and our grandchildren may very well
tear it down, just as elevated transportation
structures are being torn down all over the world
right now.
In
the interim, traffic will just keep getting worse,
quite possibly taking the prize for worst in the
nation.
If
addressing congestion is a priority, then
continuing to chase the five-legged dog is a
fool’s errand. Humpty Dumpty is broken, and no
amount of spin will put him back together again. It
is time to get realistic and serious about solving
congestion.
The
place to start is to reconsider alternatives to
the El train.
Unlike
the previous studies, we need an alternatives
analysis that actually looks at alternatives. We
then should select the option that can best reduce
congestion, support transit-oriented development,
complement existing transit services, and attract
people out of their cars, all in a cost-effective
manner.
This
should not cause significant delays, and may even
speed up the delivery of transit service to the
Dulles Corridor. A supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement could be completed in a year or
less. One option, such as BRT, could be
operational within a couple of years after that,
perhaps 2010. By contrast, the most optimistic
scenario for rail is completion in 2015.
People
recognize that Dulles Rail was botched. After more
than 10 years of studies, the best plan the
Commonwealth could produce is for a $4 billion,
blighted El train that does not even carry enough
passengers to relieve gridlock on a single road. Enough
is enough. It’s time to lasso the five legged
dog and start over.
--
September 25, 2006
|
