Choices Af­ter the Dulles Rail De­ci­sion

The Washington Post - - Letters To The Editor -

There ap­pears to be a blind spot in the dis­cus­sion of the area’s air­port fa­cil­i­ties. While a rail line to Dulles In­ter­na­tional Air­port would no doubt im­prove the of­ten long and frus­trat­ing trip, it would be very ex­pen­sive. There is an area air­port that al­ready has Am­trak and MARC train ser­vice as well as light rail. That, of course, is Bal­ti­moreWash­ing­ton In­ter­na­tional Mar­shall Air­port. The cur­rent draw­back to fully us­ing BWI is the lack of an ex­ten­sive in­ter­na­tional sched­ule, which could be reme­died much faster and at less cost than con­struct­ing a Dulles rail line.

While a Dulles rail line may make eco­nomic sense in the fu­ture, de­pend­ing on pop­u­la­tion growth, con­sid­er­a­tion should be given to mak­ing bet­ter use of the ex­ist­ing air­port as­sets, and, in par­tic­u­lar, BWI. JAMES AK­ERS

El­li­cott City

Re­gard­ing The Post’s re­port­ing on the Fed­eral Tran­sit Ad­min­is­tra­tion’s ob­jec­tions to the Dulles rail pro­posal:

None of the in­for­ma­tion is a sur­prise, but a so­lu­tion does ex­ist. More than $1 bil­lion of the cost ap­par­ently comes from do­ing a de­tour off the Route 267 right of way to aid a few landown­ers in Tysons Cor­ner, but even with the hugely ex­pen­sive de­tour, plan­ners ad­mit they will still need feeder buses to serve the Tysons area. Just stay on Route 267 all the way to Dulles, save more than $1 bil­lion, avoid the el­e­vated rail­way that has many peo­ple up­set, avoid the en­gi­neer­ing dif­fi­cul­ties of mov­ing util­i­ties, and the prob­lems are pretty much solved — with enough money left over for a peo­ple mover to pam­per those who want to travel by rail to the shop­ping malls. RON­ALD K. HENRY


Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.