If Tunnel Is Not an Option, Fairfax Intends to Vote for Plan B

All 10 members of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors think that the plan they are scheduled to consider tomorrow to extend Metro to Dulles International Airport is seriously flawed.

Yet by all accounts, they will probably vote overwhelmingly in favor of contributing $400 million to the $5.1 billion project's first phase. To do otherwise, they say, is to risk killing the entire project -- a 23-mile extension that state and local leaders have promoted for more than a decade as the region's greatest chance to relieve traffic congestion and keep Northern Virginia's economy chugging.

The flaw supervisors see is an elevated track instead of a tunnel through busy Tysons Corner. A "yes" vote keeps the project alive but eliminates the tunnel, probably forever.

A vocal group of business and civic leaders, bankrolled by Tysons developer and landowner WestGroup, has been pushing for the tunnel as the only way to remake Northern Virginia's largest business district into a pedestrian-friendly city, where people can live, work, shop and play without needing their cars.

But a "no" vote, others say, would do more than give the state more time to study whether a tunnel is practical: It would doom the project -- not only the prospect of remaking Tysons, Reston and the rest of the Dulles corridor into a series of vibrant, urban hubs, but also the more fundamental, long-sought goal of connecting Washington with its busiest airport.

"It is as important to the Washington region's place in the world as it is to Virginia's place in the global economy," said Pierce R. Homer, Virginia's secretary of transportation. Homer added that, with the addition of nonstop flights from Dulles to Beijing this year, a Metro connection to Dulles would transform that trip into a "two-seat ride" from downtown Washington.

Detailed planning for extending Metro's Orange Line to Dulles began 15 years ago. State transportation planners considered a tunnel, among other configurations, but discarded it as too expensive. The latest push for a tunnel gathered much of its steam only last fall after reports emerged that a new, cheaper tunnel-boring technology popular in Europe and Asia might work through Tysons. WestGroup offered up $3.5 million to the group TysonsTunnel.org to do an engineering study for a tunnel and to drum up grass-roots political support.

"There's a lot of evidence that it could be done in a cost-effective and timely manner," said Scott A. Monett, president of TysonsTunnel.org.

But state and federal officials cite much evidence to the contrary. Virtually everyone agrees that a tunnel is preferable to the elevated line, not only to help redevelopment in Tysons, but also to avoid the five years of chaos and congestion that aboveground construction would create in an area already paralyzed by traffic.

Project advocates say that pausing to further explore a tunnel could jeopardize $900 million in promised federal funding. Looking at a tunnel could require a new environmental review, which might take two years. By then, Dulles rail might well lose out to projects elsewhere for Federal Transit Administration funding, they say.

They also stress that chances for a successful, pedestrian-friendly project would not disappear with an elevated line. They say the character of Tysons would no more be doomed by an overhead design than King Street in Alexandria has been by its elevated rail.

"With a 'no' vote, it all goes down, and then we wait in line for another 30 years," said Gerald E. Connolly (D), chairman of the Board of Supervisors. "That would be catastrophic for the region."

Tunnel advocates consider that faulty logic. They do not think that a new environmental study is necessary or that a delay would cost the project its federal funding. They say the group of companies poised to build the overhead rail line has done what it can to preserve the current plan.

"I would say that politics is interfering with the logical analysis of engineering studies," said William B. Gallagher Jr., an architect with KGP Design Studio in Washington, who helped write a proposal to build the first phase, including a tunnel, for $2.2 billion -- substantially less than the $2.6 billion that the state is planning to spend for the aboveground method. The first phase calls for the extension to go from the West Falls Church Metro station to Wiehle Avenue in Reston.

Some have criticized the project's cost, which has climbed by more than $1 billion the past year to $5.1 billion. They blame that increase -- an escalation both sides agree is likely to continue -- on the unconventional contract Virginia negotiated with the consortium. Although Bechtel was required to compete years ago to win the original design work, negotiations for the final contract, completed just last month, were largely done in secret and without competition. Homer, the transportation secretary, said negotiating such "design-build" contracts instead of seeking separate bids for design and construction puts the burden on the contractor to design a project that works and will remain within budget.

The current debate boils down to how real the risk is that the project will die if the elevated line were scrapped. There does not seem to be any way to assess that risk other than letting the chips fall -- and a majority of rail supporters are unwilling to do that.

"If you were to ask the FTA how many people are in line to get funding for major projects, the answer is dozens," said state Del. Kenneth R. Plum (D-Fairfax), a leading booster of extending rail through his district in Reston. "How many dollars? Billions. So if you get up to the head of the line, you can't get out of the queue. Because if you do, you will go to the end of the line."