2.0 Alternatives Considered A. Draft EIS Comments Federal Agency Comments Need for Implementation of the Full Metrorail Alternative Federal Comment: BRT stations and stops should be designed as if they were rail stations. (0492 02) Response: The Project Team recommended and the decision-makers selected the Metrorail Extension with Alignment T6 in Tysons Corner as the Locally Preferred Alternative. BRT was eliminated from further consideration after the public and interagency review and comment on the Draft EIS. As described in Chapter 2 of the Draft EIS, BRT stations would have been similar to Metrorail stations. BRT stops would have had Metrorail like amenities, such as a fare pavilion with ticket vending machines and faregate arrays. Stops may also have included bus bays for feeder buses, a Kiss & Ride area for short-term parking, and commuter park-and-ride spaces. Federal Comment: For portions of the project in the freeway medians, air rights above the freeway right- of-way should be transferred and developed so that walkable uses can be placed within ¼ and ½ mile from the stations. (0492 03) Response: As stated in Chapter 5 of the Final EIS, the land use plans adopted by local government within the Dulles Corridor all contain guidelines to support transit, higher densities, mixed-use development, and walkable, bike-friendly development patterns in close proximity to the transit stations. DRPT will work with the local governments to support access to transit stations for pedestrians and cyclists and to implement transit-oriented development initiatives, although implementation of this form of development on private land is under the jurisdiction of the local government’s in the area. With respect to air rights development above Metrorail stations, the Project Team acknowledges that the two Counties govern land use and that FAA, MWAA, VDOT and TRIP II, as the owners and operators of the DIAAH, Dulles Toll Road and Dulles Greenway, must be involved. Therefore, the Project Team will await any initiative of the two Counties with the involvement of the highway owners and operators. Pedestrian walkways are provided from stations in the median of the highways to both roadsides. State Agency Comments Recognition of Programmed Study Area Highway Projects State Comment: Pg. 2-13 - The adopted FY-01 TIP/CLRP specifically identifies the following projects in the Route 28 Corridor between I-66 and VA 7: § Partial interchange at Barnsfield Road, open to traffic in 2003 § VA 606 Interchange, open to traffic in 2005 § VA 625 Interchange, open to traffic in 2005 § VA 606 Interchange, open to traffic in 2005 § Westfields Road Interchange, open to traffic in 2006 § McLearen Road Interchange, open to traffic in 2006 § Innovation Avenue Interchange, open to traffic in 2006 § Study widening to 8 lanes and upgrading to a freeway between I-66 and the Dulles Toll Road, study to be § completed by 2020 § Study upgrading to a freeway between the Dulles Toll Road and VA 7, study to be completed by 2020 Dulles Corridor Rapid Transit Project J-2-1 Final Environmental Impact Statement APPENDIX J CHAPTER 2 § The draft FY-03 TIP/CLRP specifically identifies the following projects in the Route 28 Corridor between I-66 and VA7: § Partial interchange at Barnsfield Road, open to traffic in 2003 § VA 606 Interchange, open to traffic in 2007 § VA 625 Interchange, open to traffic in 2005 § Upgrade VA 28 to a freeway (construct/interchanges/eliminate at-grade access points) and widen to eight lanes between I-66 and VA 7, open to traffic in 2015. Interchanges and widening could occur in the 2006 to 2015 time frame with all improvements open to traffic by 2015. (0421, 0421-A –15) Response: For the analyses in support of the Final EIS, the information provided by the commenter has been used to identify the significant roadways. Need to Reference Planning and Programming Documents State Comment: Planned Roadway Improvements - It is suggested that, when discussing Planned Roadway Improvements, the DCRTP DEIS report make specific reference to their source official document(s): the Six Year Program, the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the Constrained Long Range Plan (CLRP), and the Fairfax County Comprehensive Plan. Please refrain from using statements about "VDOT's decisions" that are not backed up by the approved Six Year Program or referred to in official correspondence. For projects beyond the Six Year Program time horizon, reference should be made to the source document: TIP, CLRP as appropriate (noting that these documents are the result of cooperative efforts of multiple agencies at various levels -- federal, state, local - - and subject to public review), and/or the Fairfax County Comprehensive Plan. Example planned improvements that need source clarification. (0421, 0421-A –17) Response: As suggested, all discussion of transportation programs and projects, including those of VDOT, has been appropriately referenced in the Final EIS. Need for Rail Improvements to Meet Existing and Future Demand State Comment: Rail also responds to the phenomenal growth expected in this corridor; 56 percent in population and 71 percent in employment by 2025. With a capacity to carry 50 to 60,000 passengers maximum per hour, rail can in the future not simply meet the needs of today, but it can meet the needs of tomorrow. Rail will help us meet the needs of a rapidly expanding Dulles Airport, where passenger trips forecast for 2010 have been increased from 30 million to 37 million. Rail will help meet the demands of the National Air and Space Museum, which is expected to generate 3 to 5 million visits per year. (0131, 0163-T –7) State Comment: I will highlight just a couple of the major reasons why I say we should move forward with rail now. First and foremost is the tremendous impact on the quality of life that rail transit will have for residents and employees in the corridor. People will be able to choose to take high quality, efficient rail transit service long envisioned for the corridor. Rail transit will enhance mobility and access to jobs and to cultural and educational facilities throughout the region. By providing a high capacity alternative to the single-occupant vehicle, we can use incentives in transportation measures to reduce vehicle miles of travel and improve air and water quality, a particularly important objective now. (0131, 0131-T –3) State Comment: The Dulles Corridor Rail Association recommends the rail option now. It responds to our needs today, but most importantly, it provides a key element for a quality future for our communities in the corridor. Rail enhances our mobility in the corridor and eases access to jobs, but it also, and I think importantly, opens the region to a myriad of cultural and educational programs that are available throughout the area. (0131, 0163-T –6) State Comment: I come to you tonight as an elected official saying that from my studies and my conclusions, looking at the alternatives proposed, I recommend that we choose as the Locally Preferred Alternative the rail option. (0131, 0239-T –2) Final Environmental Impact Statement J-2-2 Dulles Corridor Rapid Transit Project CHAPTER 2 APPENDIX J State Comment: And finally, as Mr. Klinge had mentioned, I chair a group called the Dulles Corridor Rail Association, and likewise our analysis says that we should go to the rail option. (0131,0239-T –4) State Comment: The organizations I have just listed [Dulles Rail Now coalition] have studied the alternatives analyzed in the draft environmental impact statement of the Dulles Corridor Rapid Transit Project, and recommend that the Commonwealth of Virginia select as the Locally Preferred Alternative the rail option that produces the most ridership and has the most flexibility for increasing ridership in the future. While the organizations in the coalition will testify at the hearings on issues of particular concern to our individual organizations, we are united in our support of bringing rail transit to the corridor of the region that is second only to the District of Columbia in terms of employment, and contains several major activity centers. (0131,0239-T –5) State Comment: Then in my capacity as chairman of the Dulles Corridor Rail Association, as I indicated, we are a membership organization made up of business and community leaders. We likewise have looked at the alternatives proposed in the project study. We unequivocally support the rail option now. (0131,0239-T –6) State Comment: The organizations I have just listed issued a statement yesterday saying that having studied the alternatives analyzed in the draft environmental impact statement of the Dulles Corridor Rapid Transit Project, recommends that the Commonwealth of Virginia select as the Locally Preferred Alternative the rail option that produces the most ridership and has the most flexibility for increasing ridership in the future. (0131, 0163-T –1) State Comment: Having studied the alternatives analyzed in the study, I strongly support Metrorail to Dulles Airport and Loudoun County as the locally preferred alternative. This alternative will provide both the highest transit ridership and the highest number of new riders, resulting in a higher percentage of people using transit. More commuters will benefit from shorter travel times than other alternatives. The best option is to build rail the full length of the project from the beginning. Most people living in my Senate district, which extends from McLean to the Loudoun County border, clearly prefer this alternative. They view rail as an attractive way to commute. They also want to have the entire system at the earliest possible date. (0298, 0298-L –1) State Comment: Likewise, as an organizer with others of the Dulles Rail Coalition Now, I want to bring to you a statement brought forth by a number of organizations supporting again the rail option.