E-Mails Reveal Kaine Aides' Hand in Loudoun Traffic Study

"Should VDOT tell Fairfax that if they approve the new development being proposed at Tysons, conditions on the Toll Road and the Beltway will worsen?" VDOT traffic engineer Robert L. Moore wrote during an exchange with colleagues in the agency's Northern Virginia office in June. "Should we tell them that they should not approve such development because of this congestion? . . . What would VDOT have said about the recent controversial development at the Vienna Metro station?"

Moore continued: "This . . . places VDOT in the middle of major land-use controversies."

In another exchange, several VDOT employees worried about the precedent the agency might be setting by conducting such a complex study on one local development proposal.

Homer agreed with them: "We can't make that a habit," he responded. "We don't have the resources to do that for every rezoning."

Homer and Dennis C. Morrison, VDOT's Northern Virginia district chief, confirmed the general accuracy of the e-mails and acknowledged that the study was directed by senior Kaine administration officials and was not simply a VDOT initiative, as characterized by Hall last month.

Homer said he came up with the idea after a request from Christopher G. Miller, president of the Piedmont Environmental Council, to study Dulles South. The PEC is an active advocate in Loudoun land-use politics and stands firmly against development near the airport. A former member of its board, Scott Kasprowicz, is Kaine's deputy secretary of transportation. Kasprowicz participated closely in the oversight of the study, the e-mails show.

Homer said the study was a good idea no matter where it came from. He and Morrison also said the study's results are sound.

"It's very simple arithmetic," Homer said. "Twenty-eight thousand homes generate nearly 280,000 trips. Those trips have to go somewhere, and no one disputes those numbers. That's the bottom line."

Robert W. Lazaro Jr., spokesman for the PEC, said he was "unimpressed" with Roherty's criticism.

"Why do they object to the state involving itself in land-use issues that will have a devastating impact on state roads, forcing taxes to go up or forcing people to have even longer commutes in their cars?"