U.S. Transportation Secretary Wants $1.058 Billion Cut From Dulles Metrorail Project
LaHood's July 3 white paper on reducing Dulles Metrorail Phase 2 costs includes aboveground station at airport.
Photos
Pdfs
U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood wants Dulles Metrorail stakeholders to cut $1.058 billion from the Phase 2 price tag, and he says that each of the funding partners must make financial sacrifices to keep the project on schedule and affordable.
The July 3 white paper presents LaHood's proposal that was crafted after five closed-door meetings since June 1 with the funding partners, including Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority board, state elected leaders and officials in Fairfax and Loudoun counties.
The second phase extends rail from Reston to Dulles International Airport and eastern Loudoun County. LaHood entered the fray as a mediator on June 1 because tensions among the stakeholders reached an all-time high with MWAA after board members decided April 6 to construct a more user-friendly underground station at Dulles Airport, which added more than $500 million to the $3.8 million price tag.
LaHood proposes that MWAA reverse that decision and build an aboveground station at the airport to save $562 million, but add $10 million in station amenities such as a windscreen and weatherization protection for the aboveground station.
LaHood also proposes the following cuts to get the total cost of Phase 2 at about $2.77 billion:
- Reduce yard and shop facility at Dulles airport: $81 million
- Fairfax County becomes responsible for the Route 28 station: $136 million
- Loudoun and Fairfax counties become responsible for five parking facilities: $235 million
- Change canopy design for Phase 1: $15 million
- Use steel structures instead of concrete: $35 million
- Change the finishes, such as roofing, flooring and platforms for the stations: $4 million
LaHood said an additional $200 million can be cut, but he won't know if it is possible until August. Those cuts are:
- MWAA use value engineering: up to $75 million
- MWAA, Loudoun and Fairfax counties donate property instead of buying the right of way needed for the project: $53 million
- Reduce by two the number of traction power substations: $34 million
- Fix engineering and design estimate discrepancies for traction power substations: $15 million
- Reduce number of railcars, pending WMATA rail fleet plan: up to $24 million
LaHood also notes that MWAA's request for $1.7 billion in federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loans was more than five times the average of any of the other 40 requests and it won't be possible to honor it. However, he says he will focus on getting a TIFIA loan for Loudoun and Fairfax counties to entice public-private investment to help pay for the five parking garages and the Route 28 station.
"Given the difference in credit worthiness between the counties and MWAA, the limited amount of TIFIA subsidy available can go a great deal farther in lowering Phase 2 costs if directed to these project elements," LaHood wrote, adding that MWAA can still apply for some assistance.
LaHood said Virginia Transportation Secretary Sean Connaughton and Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation Director Thelma Drake have discussed ways to provide additional assistance, including extending the terms of the Dulles Toll Road lease to MWAA and credit assistance from the state's new State Infrastructure Bank.
"Both of these mechanisms hold the potential for easing the financing requirements of the project and the burden on toll road users," LaHood wrote.
The main reason why state elected leaders and officials in Loudoun and Fairfax counties protested MWAA's decision to build an underground station was because the cost increase means that tolls for the Dulles Toll Road would increase.
MWAA owns the toll road and 75 percent of the second phase will be paid back with tolls. Estimates are that tolls could eventually be more than $10 to $15 one way if the funding partners cannot agree to these cuts. Phase 2 costs are split among the funding partners: Fairfax is responsible for 16.1 percent; Loudoun pays 4.8 percent; and MWAA pays 4.1 percent more without using tolls.
To read more details about the proposed cuts, view the .PDF file attatched to this article.
Bob Bruhns
1:45 pm on Thursday, July 7, 2011
Dulles Rail is such a pack of lies. Who makes up these ever-increasing cost difference figures? The difference figure went from $300 million, to $330 million, to over $400 million, to over $500 million. The last I read, it's up to $562 million now!
Looks to me like the idea is to get everybody to go for a really overpriced, badly designed above ground station, forgetting about the horribly excessive cost, even after this highly touted 'decrease' that is really a redistibution of cost to Fairfax and Loudoun Counties. And their trick seems to be working, doesn't it.
It's like some bizzare auction, "You believed that one, how about this one?" Meanwhile, comparable underground structures recently cost about $180 million, far less than the ever-increasing DIFFERENCE figure we are being handed.
When are people going to wake up and realize that they are being handed yet another lie? Probably not until business leaves the region, because of the excess costs resulting from unbelievably bad plans like Dulles Rail.
Lee Hernly
7:17 pm on Sunday, July 10, 2011
The high figures are due to the fact they are using union rules and union pay on the job.
Rob Whitfield
8:22 pm on Thursday, July 7, 2011
Dan, my memory of the list published by FTA in March 2011 is that at least two other TIFIA letters of interest were for financing requests of over $1 billion.
LaHood doesn't give a flying flip about project feasibility and ridership forecasts.
The Phase 2 project should be scrapped until its economic and financial feasibilty has been established. If Fairfax and Loudoun County want to commit more taxpayer funding to this project, then first 50% of County workers pension plan funds should be earmarked to low interest loans to subsidize the project. After all, the Counties use our money to subsidize other unfeasible projects.
Private Person
7:19 am on Friday, July 8, 2011
That's correct --- like granite counters, stainless-steel appliances in gourmet kitchens for the "poor" six-figure earners funded by and housed through the housing authority.
Keep in mind that we pay many times over since these units are not paying taxes -- thousands of county-owned units off the tax rolls.
Dan Telvock
9:43 am on Friday, July 8, 2011
Rob, LaHood was referring to the overall average of all of the requests, and not against each one. I think that might make a difference in what he is saying.
Private Person
7:16 am on Friday, July 8, 2011
He's 1/3 of the way there. Cut the other $2 billion and we have a decent deal.
Joe Cantwell
11:05 am on Friday, July 8, 2011
Put an airport 40 miles away from the population and business centers, make no provisions for connecting the airport to the public rail system, enact business-killing laws to force people to fly out of that airport, wait 40 years to link airport to subway then make passengers trudge hundreds of yards in the heat or cold to reach the terminal. Insanity!
Dulles will never be a world-class airport but it can be made more convenient. Make the investment - put the Metro station underground and as close to the terminal as possible.
Mark Williams
9:07 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Bingo. As a region, we are all stuck with the costs, logistical difficulties and impracticalities of having the largest (in terms of passenger throughput capacity) airport we have practically located closer to Winchester than Washington, at least in terms of travel time. The situation will never be perfect. And Dulles rail will indeed be used heavily by airport employees (and Federal employees and contractors who won't be able to bill taxis once rail is in place). But we can't just sit on it and complain. When on the corridor, take Amtrak only. When forced to fly, you should be able to get to Dulles reliably, without spending more on the taxi than the flight, and without having to run a marathon before getting to TSA screening.
Bob Bruhns
2:37 pm on Friday, July 8, 2011
I really think that a properly designed underground terminal could cost far less than the lowest cost above ground price they are making up today. Dulles Rail is a pack of lies.
Private Person
10:28 am on Saturday, July 9, 2011
You are right -- and that was proven with the Tyson's Underground coalition studies and recommendations. Unfortunately, that movement was not successful and we will be stuck with one of the ugliest eyesores ever to (dis)grace Tyson's Corner. We will soon be missing the car dealerships for the attractiveness they once brought to the Pike.
The BSD Guy
2:39 pm on Friday, July 8, 2011
Rail-to-Dulles has never been anything more than WELFARE FOR DEVELOPERS. It's a symbol of how special interests, on both political parties, can effectively hijack the will of the people and turn it into a money maker at the expense of everyone else.
Developers "plans" (or as some say, scams) now include the ultra high densitization of Reston with high rises, office complexes, and theoretically, people. The catch here is the word "people". The developers mantra is, and always has been, "If we build it, they will come."
Well ..... they built a lot, but they didn't come. The area is FILLED with empty or marginally full office buildings. The demand for developers new housing is SO LOW that the county is now using homes that should be occupied by people with incomes of $150,000/year or more as subsidized housing in an attempt to prevent developers and their dimwitted investors from losing their shirts.
They built it, but no one came. If the cost of rail had been directly limited to those areas likely to use it, and the true costs cast onto those recipients, it NEVER would have been started. It's just another example of a special interest group (developers) using crack-pipe economics to con unwitting, dishonest, or flat out stupid local politicians into believing something that makes no sense whatsoever actually makes sense.
....AND WE GET STUCK WITH ALL THE COSTS AND ALL THE PROBLEMS....NOW THAT'S DEMOCRACY!!!!
Joe
3:13 am on Friday, July 22, 2011
I saw the draft design of the aerial airport station and it's not as awful as some are making it out to be. It will be a financial sacrifice of course, at first. But once the second phase is completed, the is no doubt that linking this area with the metro network, especially the airport, will provide an enormous economic boost.
Bob Bruhns
1:02 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
The truth was a little different from what pen-name posters told us then. Here is what pro-rail leaders had to say about the Dulles Airport rail station.
Pro-rail former Fairfax County Supervisor Stuart Mendelsohn: "Rail is really there to get the employees there. Six-hundred feet really isn't going to stop the employees from using it." ... "Often, fewer travelers use the rail to get to the airport than airport employees."
- Dulles Corridor Predicted to See Success with Rail
Herndon Patch, September 17, 2010
http://herndon.patch.com/articles/dulles-corridor-predicted-to-see-success-with-rail
Pro-rail Fairfax County BOS chair Sharon Bulova: “The percentage of people actually coming to the airport station to get on a plane will be a relatively small percentage." ... "Most who use the station will be employees and the garage location is more convenient for them."
- Sharon Bulova Pushes for Alternative Location for Dulles Airport Metro Station
Herndon Patch, April 19, 2011
http://herndon.patch.com/articles/sharon-bulova-pushes-for-alternative-location-for-dulles-airport-metro-station
Pro-rail Virginia Secretary of Transportation Sean Connaughton: "The vast majority of those who will wind up using the Dulles Metro station will be airport employees." ... "...just a few travellers."
- Airports Authority Chooses More Costly and 'User-Friendly' Option for Dulles Metro Station
WMAL, April 20, 2011
http://wmal.com/Article.asp?id=2154797
CC Mojo
3:13 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
We all went into this project knowing there would be costs involved, and it stands to reason that once there was the "green light," that different scenarios would come into play. Without a doubt, the decision-makers will be carefully looking at all these choices and helping to come up with a plan that benefits the toll road users, tax payers, developers, etc.
Bob, those comments you just posted are why Metro needed to be approved further West, past the airport. I'm so glad we agree that was the right choice :)
And, again and again, the benefits of Metro far outweigh the costs in the long run. Nothing in this world is free, but an investment in the future is absolutely priceless.
Bob Bruhns
5:28 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
I disagree with your cost-benefit analysis, CC. And we knew in 2011 (when that 'enormous economic boost, especially because of Dulles Airport' claim was posted), that the rail line would be going to Ashburn. What it all meant was that Fairfax County was sold the line about rail to Dulles Airport, and people still responded to that story, but then MWAA went hog wild, jacking up the costs every way they could, and (1) the counties had to push back on the Dulles Airport station cost, and (2) Loudoun County residents had to be sold on a rail line that cost loads of money, but ended in Ashburn.
MWAA must feel bad now, because it has been reduced to a mere shadow of its former self. Its days of Billion dollar cost overruns are behind it, so now it is reduced to satisfying itself by jacking up only costs that are hidden - for example, it recently jacked up the cost of the Rt 28 rail station by 22%, and it jacked up the cost of the five Phase II parking garages by 29% - in a single year! And those prices were already 76% to 100% high a year ago.
Amazing! Such a great feat of hyperinflation, and no applause from the cheering crowds? Our so-called 'leaders' and our complicit news media, of course, kept that very quiet.
You know, those costs were supposedly removed from the rail project... funny that MWAA still controls them.
CC Mojo
6:09 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
Nobody claimed exact costs. Nobody could even start bidding until we opted in. Estimates are estimates for a reason, and in the interim between the first estimates and now, costs have risen. Do you complain when you estimate the cost of a home-cooked spaghetti dinner rises over a few weeks because tomato prices have risen due to drought?
Knowing costs would rise before the final contacts are in place, I'm just glad we passed Metro into Loudoun when we did, instead of waiting any longer.
Bob Bruhns
8:25 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
Outrageously high estimates are outrageously high estimates for a reason, too, CC. The July 2011 estimates for the Rt 28 rail station and the five Phase II parking garages was already 76% to 100% high, and MWAA actually had the gall to jack them up another 22% to 29% - in a single year. But what do they care - they don't have to pay 4.1% of them with airport funds, or apply 75% of them to the Dulles Toll Road tolls - unless the counties 'fail' to get funding to pay these ridiculous prices.
Your argument that since MWAA kept jacking the prices up, we had to buy quickly, reminds me very much of the mentality of the housing bubble. I think the result will be similar, too - a major financial struggle for this entire Northern Virginia region. I imagine that the 'lessons learned' on this job will include a section on how MWAA should have jacked the prices up even faster, so people would capitulate and buy the rail line faster than they did, saving MWAA the embarrassment of several revealing audits. I lament that Dulles Rail has turned Northern Virginia into some kind of comic strip, being played out in real life.
All in all, the pro-rail arguments are like the story of the two men who had a truck, and tried to buy tomatos for twenty cents, and sell them for ten cents. After a while, they noticed that they were actually losing money. So one man said to the other, "I think we need a bigger truck." Mildly amusing, but not a very good idea.
Gregg Williams
12:20 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
It has been great reading all of your comments about this project. Personally, I think they should push for an underground station at the Dulles Airport. Having an above ground station is like being in the car business, and designing an ugly car on purpose because you can save some money by not using computers. Sure, you saved some money, but then you are stuck with if for years and years, unless you choose to redesign it. I say do it right the first time.
matt tallmerq
9:25 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Just remember, Alexandria taxpayers are being asked to foot the bill for a minimum $270 million Metro station that Metro refused to build. Sure, the city says Potomac Yard developers eventually will pay for it . . . . in 20 years at best; 50 at worst.
Lee Hernly
10:00 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Matt -
The thing I hear most from folks I know in Del Ray is why was the Potomac Greens development shielded from the Special Tax District when they'll benefit as well?
Joseph M.
12:38 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Wrong. Bonds will be floated, backed by the incremental $0.20/$100.00 (or .2%) tax on the properties within the Potomac Yard development (excluding the existing Potomac Greens area behind and including Rustico).
As the taxes come in, the bonds will be paid off. The tax district has already started and is paying for the Environmental Impact Studies on where to locate the station.
Potomac Yards had by-right zoning for 2.5 million. Now it has been approved for 7.5 million sq feet in development. The taxes on the extra 5 million sq feet will pay for the Metro plus feed into the City's coffers.
matt tallmerq
10:51 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Ask the city
Dave Webster
5:25 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
When I worked for Jack Kent Cooke we tried to get approval to build the new Redskins stadium at Potomac Yards. Many Alexandria residents objected on the grounds that the Stadium would increase traffic in the area. We pointed out that traffic would only be increased on game days and special events days whereas large scale commercial development would create traffic 7 days a week.
For some reason not many residents bought that argument and said there wouldn't be any commercial development on that land.
amy lu
10:41 am on Monday, August 13, 2012
Many residents (me included) did not want to see Ballston high-rise type development, but to say residents claimed there wouldn't be would any commercial development? Your comment Mr. Webster, is false. For us to believe traffic would only increase on game days and special events ignores pressure from increased development elsewhere combined with limited existing transportation options - that would not be address by Cooke's stadium proposal. Projected tax revenues generated by a stadium were insufficient to address transportation improvements required for the stadium, let alone increasing POV dependency. The stadium was a bad deal for Alexandria; even the neighborhood's most die-hard Redskins fan realized this, may she rest in peace. The stadium, an un-enlivened expanse of impervious surface vs. an opportunity to create centers of commerce, parks and community where you don't need to own a car to live, work and play. I joined my civic association specifically to oppose the stadium. Why? The 'problematic' by-right interim use provided convenient shopping; its revenues help fulfill the existing communities vision for development. A stadium wouldn't.